18 of 25 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Very valuable work!!!, August 22, 2005
This review is from: Correcting the Cults: Expert Responses to Their Scripture Twisting (Paperback)
Buy this book for your reference, 'cause it is very useful! Good, good, good book
:D
well, If you familiar with Geisler Works, such as "When Skeptics ask" or "When critics ask", then you won't be surprized with format of this book. It takes Bible verses, over which confusion happens in various cults and clarifies original meaning of the passage by Biblical exegesis. Most, if not all, confusions happen due to misinterpretation, and pride of self-sufficiency :D ...when teacher doesn't evaluate context and does eisegesis instead of exegesis... which is very popular thing to do nowadays ;) !!!
I think this book must be present on EVERY Bible teacher's shelf to avoid mistakes of interpretation. Don't invent (square)wheel again, 'cause it won't work anyways. What can be worst than teaching others wrong doctrines???? This must be taken seriously!!!
God bless, and examine yourself teachers!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Refuting the Scripture Twisters, November 2, 2009
This review is from: Correcting the Cults: Expert Responses to Their Scripture Twisting (Paperback)
There are a myriad of books which counter the false claims of cults and aberrant new religious groups. In this volume two evangelical heavy-weights team up to furnish the scriptural and philosophical truths to refute the cultists.
This is one of the few books where a reviewer won't be exaggerating in declaring that one must own this book (on the condition that the person affirms truth and aspires to apologetically guard it). The reason that this effort is a necessary weapon in the apologist's arsenal: it includes a colossal amount of correct interpretations of Bible verses that cultists twist in an attempt to promulgate their false doctrine.
The authors defend the text of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation whereas they present the verse, then the misinterpretation, and then the proper biblical exegesis. They offer a wide-ranging, comprehensive, and insightful survey that will be a perfect compliment to any other admirable cult-apologetic book you possess.
This volume contains:
- an impressive Bibliography
- Scripture index
- Topical index
- and a Cult Research Organization compilation
You may avow a different apologetic school than the authors (like I do), but all Christians can readily utilize this outstanding tool in witnessing to members of cults.
By Mike A Robinson author of: "God Does Exist!" and:
Presuppositional Apologetics Examines Mormonism: How Van Til's Apologetic Refutes Mormon Theology
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
cult vs doctrinal difference, January 2, 2009
This review is from: Correcting the Cults: Expert Responses to Their Scripture Twisting (Paperback)
The apostle Paul stated, "...that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation." Romans 10:9-10 NASB
It is my understanding that this is what is necessary to become a Christian. Since there are numerous Scriptures concerning the foundational teachings of the 12 apostles, and of Christ the Cornerstone, one may say that this passage from Romans is perhaps the basics or starting point or the minimum requirement to be a Christian. At the same time it does set the requirements of faith and confession as being foundational to all that we receive from Christ our Lord. "...But my righteous one shall live by faith..." Heb. 11:38
What is a cult then? I believe that from a Christian perspective a "cult" consists of those who do not accept Jesus Christ as the only access to God and do not believe that His atoning blood is the only way to recieve His right-standing (righteousness) with God, which is a gift. Instead they teach the following of some other human or other being or doctrine as a way of "salvation" or "unity with god" or whatever.
The authors began the book with a definition of cults that seems to cover the necessary ingredients. The opening statement is excellent: "There are a number of doctrinal characteristics of cults. One will typically find an emphasis on a new revelation from God, a denial of the sole authority of the Bible, a denial of the Trinity, a distorted view of God and Jesus, or a denial of salvation by grace."
But, the "doctrinal" definition leaves them open to insert their particular doctrinal bent as a reason to bash fellow Christians that see some things differently. In many places they take issue with Christians that I believe clearly teach the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and they label them as cultists. I strongly disagree with this approach.
This is as much as to say that "orthodoxy" is only held within your denomination. And that anything outside of your "orthodoxy" is a cult or false religion. Even if you think "your doctrines" are the only correct ones, don't list brothers in Christ together with the Mormons, JWs and others that are clearly outside of faith in Christ. Lumping them all together and calling Pentecostals and Word-Faith people cultists is the simply religious arrogance. It smacks of the same erroneous thinking that the authors say the cultists hold - namely that they are right and everyone else is wrong.
Wherever the authors address the "real cults", they do a good job refuting the errors. But when you read their take on some of the Christians they differ with doctrinally I would advise caution. Sometimes maybe something needs to be addressed, but the clear implication is that the author's understanding of a passage of Scripture is the only correct one and those who disagree are not really true Christians, but are cultists. This attitude is what causes divisions in the body of Christ and is not of the Holy Spirit. It is the same attitude that begets denominations and cults.
Issues like whether Christ is God or whether or not Christ is a created being, whether He was born into humanity by a virgin mother, are important issues that need to be understood correctly. But whether you believe the atonement of Christ included only spiritual eternal life or whether it also includes physical healing and provision for this life, ("...for by His wounds you were healed" I Peter 2:24), are not matters of cultism. They are matters of faith in what the Word says.
For example, if you do not wish to believe in healing I am not going to call you a cultist. I may ask that if you believe that sickness is from God then why do you go to the doctor to get healed? Obey God and stay sick. But if you confess Christ as your Lord I will not call you less a brother if you are sick and wish to stay that way.
In discussing Is 53:4-5 the author did not quote the Hebrew text: "Surely our sicknesses He Himself bore; and our pains He carried;..." obviously because it would confuse his explanation of "spiritual" healing. Why use the Hebrew text elsewhere but not here? "Orthodoxy" does not except the face value of this text. So, am I then a cultist because I believe this scripture includes both physical and spiritual healing as is born out in the Hebrew text and in many other passages?
There are lots of "funny doctrines" floating around in the church, some in the denomination represented by the authors I dare say. But they are brothers, even if they think they are the only correct ones. They, like all the rest of us, see some things clearly and some as through a mirror. I Cor. 13:12 We need to keep this in perspective.
Bottom line; if you read this book, glean the good while keeping your heart in the right place, knowing that Christians like Kenneth E Hagin are not cultists (I am not part of Rhema or any "Word-Faith" group).
Ironically, Kenneth Hagin started out in a Baptist church as a kid, was given up for dead with an incurable heart disease and told by Baptist folks he would have to accept death. He was miraculously healed at age 17 and lived to something like 88. All those years standing on the promises in the Word that promise healing. Baptists probably don't like that kind of testamony but Kenneth never bashed them for thir unbelief of such promises, he only praised God for his healing. Several like Kenneth Hagin are lumped together with cults because of the author's doctrinal differences of understanding. If that were true then everybody outside of your denomination is a cult in your eyes. As stated, believing this way is one of the attitudes listed as a cultist attitude.
The book has good information, but also has doctrinal variations from other true believers in Christ. Taken wrong this can lead one to believe that some people are cultists, which the authors intend us to believe, and not brothers and sisters in Christ.
To be intellectually and spiritually honest, it would have been better for the authors to have two sections in the book, one for true cults - those that do not believe in Christ as Savior and Lord but claiim to be Christian, and one section for those the authors simply disagree with.
Incidently, plucking a statement out of a message or book without any honest context does not prove anything about whether someone is a true brother or a cultist. That is using the same tactics the cults use. A true test is, "You shall know them by their fruit".
Lastly I would add, that if "orthodoxy" is what we are after, that would be a general consensus among hundreds of denominations, most of which the authors would consider "in error" I am sure, and all of which consider themselves to be the "only true church". So, which denominations besides the authors' denomination, is trustworthy? Even the Baptists follow Calvin's "revelation" where others do not, so which one is orthodox? Even the authors apparently have quite a "following". However, while I do not know them, I believe they are brothers in Christ making every effort in this book to dispel error as they see it.
But, if Truth is what we are after it is found in Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church, as He is revealed by the Holy Spirit of Truth who is sent to live within all who call upon Him honestly. Do we have to study "orthodoxy" to know the Truth, or is the Holy Spirit trustworthy to "...lead us into all truth" in the Scriptures as Jesus said He would?
I believe that if people are really seeking Truth with the help of the "Spirit of Truth" they will find Him. If they are seeking to "make a name for themselves" or seeking to find "their own way" they will be led into error, whether in an "orthodox" denomination or not (whichever one that may be). Pride, after all, is the root of error, and since "knowledge puffs up" it is potentially a fundamental weakness of "learned" people. Therefore we must pursue genuine humility along with increased knowledge or we will stumble.
"The Lord knows those who are His"..., we need to be careful in our accusations of one another lest we be in league with the "accuser of the brethren". That kind of works are "wood, hay, and stubble - they burn up when tested by fire!
At the same time, exposing blatant twisting of Scripture to support any false teaching that deviates from truth in Christ is both necessary and good. This book does expose cultic error with good explanations and documentation and I commend the authors for that portion of the book that does so.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
