SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation

Give To SermonIndex
Text Sermons : ~Other Speakers A-F : Discernment Reasearch Articles : More Rampant Anti-intellectualism from the Anointed Gnostic - Mr. Jesse Duplantis

Open as PDF

Naturally, the devil tried to shut down this living, breathing Church. He wanted dry bones. He began to take the freshness of God and put Ecclesiastical dogma on it. He used theological Understanding to water down the fire.@ (Jesse Duplantis, Voice of the Covenant magazine, November 1997, p. 7)

Here is a prime example of the disdain that many charismatic leaders have for classical Biblical education. The devil tried to shut down the Church. How? Satan took the freshness of God and put Ecclesiastical dogma on it.

What is Ecclesiastical dogma? Ecclesiastical comes from a Greek word ekklhsia meaning assembly or Church. Dogma comes to us from another Greek term dokew, to think, to seem good. Dogma is used several times in the New Testament. In Col. 2:14 it refers to the decrees laid down by the apostles. Ecclesiastical dogma refers to the authoritative decrees given by the apostles, the early Church fathers and others.

Does Jesse Duplantis really wants people to believe that Satan used the apostles and the other founding fathers of the Church to Atake away the freshness of God@? For what purpose? Why would men (who in many cases were put to death for their unrelenting faith in Christ) want to put out the freshness of God (whatever that is)? Jesse does not explain why, he simply lays the charge out there for the readers. Then he goes on to state that Satan used Theological understanding to put out the fire of God@ in the Church. Is that so? Can he cite any specific examples? Upon what does he base these statements?

Somehow in the minds of most charismatic people a Biblical education is a hindrance to being used by God to His glory. The years of study and training in the areas of hermeneutics, systematic theology, Biblical counseling, and the original languages is detrimental to the work of God. In fact, Satan uses these very tools to put out the fire of God!

Most theologians don=t fasten their eyes on Jesus. They fasten their eyes on the Greek and the Hebrew. There=s nothing wrong with Greek and Hebrew. There=s nothing wrong with study. But why should we study? To know more about Jesus. A lot of people get so involved in study that they take God out and deal with mere words. (Ibid.p. 7)

AMost@ means the majority. I would not say that Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Knox, or Jonathan Edwards (to name a few), did not fasten their eyes on Jesus. In fact, I know of very few theologians who did not fasten their gaze upon the Master. Again, Jesse makes a sweeping statement without citing one example.

I am glad Jesse thinks there is nothing wrong with studying Greek and Hebrew. He would find out how wonderful it is if he would take a class in it himself, something he has never done. Actually, Jesse has no formal Bible training whatsoever.

How does Mr. Duplantis expect anyone to Aknow@ Jesus apart from His Word? The only accurate objective truth we have about the Lord Jesus Christ is contained in the Bible. The more in depth one studies the Bible the more they can truly appreciate Jesus. Obviously ones does not have to know Hebrew or Greek to have a vibrant relationship with the Lord. . .but it does not hurt! Even if I was not called to the ministry I would still take the time to learn Greek if given the opportunity. Why? Simply because by knowing the original language I am not at the mercy of the translator(s).

It is the Biblically literate person who is a threat to the Jesse Duplantis=s of the world. It is those who do know the languages, who do possess the skills in hermeneutics that can defend true Christian doctrine that give these preachers problems. Let me cite a few statements Jesse makes in the beginning of his article:

He begins by relating the account of Jesus reading from Luke 4:18 and from this text he makes the following comments (all taken from The Nov. 1997 Voice of the Covenant magazine p.5):

The very first thing on Jesus` agenda was to get rid of poverty!
Would you like to know why some people, including ministries, never get out of poverty? It=s not because they aren't=t smart. It=s not because they don=t have windows of opportunity. It=s because they=re not anointed. If you=re not anointed, poverty will follow you all the days of your life.
His first objective was to get rid of poverty.
Obviously, He consider poverty a worse problem than blind eyes.

I think I can rest my case on the need to have a solid Biblical education ,especially if you are going to teach 1,000's of people! If getting rid of poverty was the first thing on Jesus` agenda than I must tell you He failed miserably! Jesus never said that was His mission. He never taught on how to get out of poverty. He did not give any Akeys@ or Asteps@ on financial freedom (like our Word of Faith ministers do). Let=s consider some lexical studies on the word Jesus used in Luke 4:18.

Luke 4:18: pneu'ma kurivou ejp! ejme; ou| ei{neken e[crisen me eujaggelivsasqai ptwcoi', ajpevstalken me, khruvxai aijcmalwvtoi" a[fesin kai; tufloi'" ajnavbleyin, ajpostei'lai teqrausmevnou" ejn ajfevsei,

Strong=s Concordances Concordance:

4434 ptochos { pto-khos=} from ptosso, to crouch, akin to 4422 and the alternate of 4098; TDNT - 6:885,969; adj AV - poor 30, beggar 2, poor man 1, beggarly 1; 34.

Vine=s Expository Dictionary:

1.ptomchos (ptwcov), (4434)), for which see Beg, B, has the broad sense of Apoor,@ (a) literally, e.g., Matt. 11:5; 26:9, 11; Luke 21:3 (with stress on the word, >a conspicuously poor widow=); John 12:5, 6, 8; 13:29; Jas. 2:2, 3, 6; the poor are constantly the subjects of injunctions to assist them, Matt. 19:21; Mark 10:21; Luke 14:13, 21; 18:22; Rom. 15:26; Gal. 2:10; (b) metaphorically, Matt. 5:3; Luke 6:20; Rev. 3:17.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament:

In 4:18 preaching the gospel to the poor has thematic significance. In 14:21, which refers to the eschatological banquet, the poor are invited along with the maimed and blind, and in 14:13 it is these that one should invite to a feast. In 16:19ff. the poor man is the recipient of divine grace and the rich man, by his self-centeredness, is ineluctably alienated from God. In contrast, the rich Zacchaeus, when he meets Jesus, displays extraordinary generosity to the poor. Other passages (6:24-25; 8:14; 12:15ff.; 14:33; 16:10ff.) stress the perils of wealth. There is no primary interest here in the poor as such, but in the salvation of the rich, whom their wealth rivets to this world.

The word ptochos does not mean poverty, it refers to the poor as a class of people. The text does not say or imply in the slightest that Jesus came to "get rid of poverty." Jesus came to preach to the poor people, not to get rid of poverty. If Jesse did a little more study he would have seen this and hopefully not made such foolish statements.

Jesus said Athe poor you have with you always@ (Matt. 26:11). The apostle James has the gall to say that the Apoor are rich in faith@ (James 2:5). In Rev. 2:9 the Master reminds His people that He Aknows their poverty@ (the same Greek root as in Luke 4:18) but reminds them that they are truly rich.

Jesse goes on to say that the reason there are poor ministers and ministries is because they are not "anointed." Somehow Jesse's concept of the "anointing" is tied into financial wealth. This too is false. To him, financial prosperity is a sign of divine favor which means that people like Robert Tilton, Oral & Richard Roberts, Peter Popoff, and W.V. Grant must be tremendously "anointed." It would also mean that Mr. Moon leader of the Unification Church cult, the President of the Mormon Church, Elizabeth Claire Prophet are also "anointed" because of their wealth. All of these people I have mentioned have gained their wealth from the pockets of their followers . . . and not God. It is also interesting to note that almost all of the books and teachings on financial prosperity have their origin in America. You will not find these type of books coming from Haiti, India, or other destitute places. However, you will find vibrant congregations filled with people who have placed their total trust in the Jesus of the Bible . . .eternal riches indeed.

Mr. Duplantis has another version of Jesus and of wealth than that presented in the Bible. I have cited just a few examples of what was on Jesus` list of priorities.

Jesus came to save His people from their sins (Matt. 1:21).
Jesus came to do good and heal those oppressed by the devil (Acts 10:38).
He came to preach the acceptable year of the Lord (Luke 4:19).
He came to fulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

Jesus never said "I have come to destroy poverty." Jesus never uttered one promise that He would make us rich materially. I wish Jesse would take time and truly study the Bible and get to really know the Jesus of the Bible, instead of the Americanized Jesus of the western world.

Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy