Beth Moore: The John Piper Connection and Her Very Bad Doctrine

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
Alex Guggenheim's picture
Offline
Since
Tue, 6/2/09
Posts: 1585
Beth Moore: The John Piper Connection and Her Very Bad Doctrine

The past 5 years has seen a rise in the prominence of Beth Moore as a "Bible Teacher" within Evangelical ranks. She is extremely popular within many Southern Baptist churches but also outside of that circle within Evangelical churches. Beth Moore is touted as an orthodox instructor "for women". The claim of her validity as a teacher of the bible by her students and peers rests in her refusal to be ordained or accept a formal ecclesiastical office. She maintains that women cannot rightly be ordained. But never minding this delicate adjudication that allows her, in reality, to function as an authority of Scripture within Evangelical churches and churches that otherwise would, by their constitution and theological expression, not invite any such woman, she nevertheless has found a way to fly under the radar with this license.

Unfortunately she, like all women who exit their role of teaching within the limits allowed by Scripture and embark on a career as a "teacher of the Scriptures" or one that teaches with such authority, Beth Moore has also exited into error. Here is just a sample of her egregious dictum:

http://www.extremetheology.com/2010/03/beth-moores-dangerous-bible-twist...

She states at the 40 minute mark:

Quote:
If we receive Christ as our Savior, but we never recognize and by faith believe him to also be our healer and our restorer, then we just stay as cracked as we were when he got here

Beth Moore is a "pop psychologist/theologist (the word theologian simply is too unfitting) who is following the line of many before her in turning the Scriptures upside down to provide a remedy for social and psychological inadequacies while now and then throwing in references to recognizable doctrine concepts.

I included John Piper's name in the title noting his indiscretion (personally I do not view it as an indiscretion with respect to Piper, rather it was typical of a Neo-Evangelical) in the eyes of some regarding his past alliances with theological extremist Doug Wilson (past invitee) and his recent invitation of Rick Warren for his Desiring God Conference because John Piper also offers Beth Moore's teaching as part of his Women's Bible Study curriculum, shedding even more light on Piper's weak theological discrimination.

http://www.hopeingod.org/sites/default/files/documents/Women%27s%20Bible...

Another article on Beth Moore's drift into confusion:

http://cicministry.org/commentary/worldview0006.htm

Dan Miller's picture
Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 272
looking for more...

Alex was quoting Beth Moore wrote:
If we receive Christ as our Savior, but we never recognize and by faith believe him to also be our healer and our restorer, then we just stay as cracked as we were when he got here.
There really isn't enough in this quote to say that she has very bad doctrine - or even that she has bad doctrine. "We stay just as cracked" - what does that mean? "Healer and restorer" is also a little vague.

"Cracked" isn't a word that has a traditional theological usage. If "cracked" simply means that one is "not overcoming sin through sanctification by faith," then I don't see what is wrong with the statement.

Does she specify what she means by "cracked"?

Alex Guggenheim's picture
Offline
Since
Tue, 6/2/09
Posts: 1585
Dan Miller wrote: Alex was

Dan Miller wrote:
Alex was quoting Beth Moore wrote:
If we receive Christ as our Savior, but we never recognize and by faith believe him to also be our healer and our restorer, then we just stay as cracked as we were when he got here.
There really isn't enough in this quote to say that she has very bad doctrine - or even that she has bad doctrine. "We stay just as cracked" - what does that mean? "Healer and restorer" is also a little vague.

"Cracked" isn't a word that has a traditional theological usage. If "cracked" simply means that one is "not overcoming sin through sanctification by faith," then I don't see what is wrong with the statement.

Does she specify what she means by "cracked"?

First I provided a link to an audio of some rather well documented additional statements which are also outside the boundaries of orthodox articulations regarding Christian soteriology. I invite you again to listen (realizing your time is important but if you are using or recommending her material or suspending any opinion then investigation into her growing departures beckons) to the audio link. As well there are additional links. My assumption is that any investigation into the matter would explore these sources.

But just taking this one segment, either Beth Moore is ignorant of the implications of her statement or she simply has chosen to ignore orthodoxy and supplement it with pop psychology/theology. And I am surprised by what seems to be your languid view of the implications present in the declaration by Moore that if a believer does not, as Moore claims, "recognize and by faith believe him to also be our healer and our restorer" they are just as cracked (meaning in need of being put together) as when Christ arrived to save them (she is using a metaphor so I am sticking with it in describing our salvation as the arrival of Jesus). NO!

When we needed saved we were in shambles, destined to hell, without hope. Beth Moore has denied all that is present in our redemption when she asserts such. When Christ arrives to save us indeed we are so cracked we cannot be put together apart from Divine restoration. Is she really suggesting that before we are saved and after we are saved we are just as cracked if we don't progress to the point of Beth Moore's doctrine of seeing Jesus as our "healer and restorer" for our psychological needs? Where in the Bible is this and is she even aware that is exactly what happens when we do get saved?

And Beth Moore wasn't talking about "overcoming sin through sanctification by faith" (another topic altogether with respect to who the overcomer is and what we should have in view with respect to overcoming), Moore was referring to the state of one's psyche with respect to past sufferings, injuries maladjustments. BTW this is amplified in her pop psychology/theology book So Long, Insecurity which converts the doctrine of our redemption into a remedy for psychological issues.

But the worst case is really with what she said in its plain fashion. When we receive Christ as our Savior we receive, at that very moment (regardless of this additional healer and restorer idea that Beth Moore now wants to introduce) an astounding number of gifts from God of which and from which have an explicit and implicit impact on any such assertion by anyone that we are still just as cracked as we were when Christ arrived and here are just some of what we receive:

Quote:
Imputed Righteousness
Justification
Regeneration
Eternal Life Imputed by God
Baptism of the Holy Spirit
Propitiation
Reconciliation
Redemption
Forgiveness
Removal of Condemnation
Removal of Domination of the Old Sin Nature
Removal of Satan’s Power
Freedom From the Penalty of the Mosaic Law
Identification with Jesus Christ
Indwelling of the Holy Spirit
Indwelling of Jesus Christ
Indwelling of God the Father
The Permanent Sealing of Your Salvation
Circumcision of the Soul
Spiritual Assets Called our Riches
Royal Adoption
Eternal Relationship to God
We are a Gift to Christ
Royal Priesthood
We are a Chosen Generation
We are His Inheritance
We Inherit Christ’s Eternal Future

Maybe if Beth Moore explored the nature of our salvation from God and its immeasurable grace and the gifts given the moment we are saved and understood just how not cracked any believer is the moment they believe no matter how poorly they may progress afterward, maybe she would not find it necessary to compensate for such a lack of inculcation with the invention and superimposition upon the gospel and the rest of Christian doctrine with such toxic redirections.

But here is another link with some interesting documentation where Beth Moore claims among many things, direct revelation from God!
http://watchmansbagpipes.blogspot.com/2008/05/beth-moore-revisited.html

But in case time does not permit here is a sampling of the author's documentation:

Quote:
1. “One of the things God wants to do throughout this nine weeks we’re going to spend together is empower our prayer life.” How does she know that God wants to do this? (Session 1)

2. “What God began to say to me about five years ago, and I’m telling you it sent me on such a trek with Him, that my head is still whirling over it. He began to say to me, ‘I’m gonna tell you something right now, Beth, and boy you write this one down, and you say it as often as I give you utterance to say it: My Bride is paralyzed by unbelief. My Bride is paralyzed by unbelief.’ And He said, ‘Startin’ with you.’” God says, “and boy you write this one down”????? I find it interesting that God talks so “down to earth.” Is the Church really paralyzed by unbelief? Maybe I’m just a cynic, but I can’t believe this conversation took place. (Session 1)

3. “And this came as a direct revelation of the Spirit because this would never have come to me. I know God spoke this over me as He began turning through a concordance in my mind and I started thinking about one Scripture after another.” Notice she even says, “direct revelation.” (Session 3)

4. A de facto revelation of God is this claim: “God is desiring for His church to have a revival of true faith in who He is and what He can do and what He desires to do in our generation.” How does she know this? (Session 3)

5. Moore has another special revelation: “Don’t buy the press that they [those in leadership positions ] have it all together. If they did, God wouldn’t even be using them. Because I’m going to tell you, He wants people in process. They’ve got a fresh word going on in their lives. When they’ve got it all together, He’ll take them home.” Now, from where does she get this idea? Where is the Scriptural justification for this claim? (Session 5)

6. Another de facto revelation: “God is doing something huge in the church today, and I don’t want us to miss it.” If God is really doing something in the church, are Christians going to miss it? (Session 5)

7. Moore has a conversation with God which sets her up as an authority when she teaches: “You know what He told me not too long ago? I told you when I first began this whole concept, He first started teaching it to me about five years ago, and He said these words to me: ‘Baby, you have not even begun to believe Me. You haven’t even begun!’ You know what He said just a few days ago? ‘Honey, I just want you to know we’re just beginning.’ Oh, glory! That meant I had begun. Hallelujah! But He was telling me, ‘When this ends, we ain’t done with this. Honey, this is what we do for the rest of your life.’ And He said those words to me over and over again: ‘Believe Me. Believe Me. And I hope it’s starting to ring in your ears, over and over again, Believe Me.’” (Session 6)

8. “I don’t know how I even learned this except that God just taught it to me Himself.” So now God has been personally teaching her! (Session 7)

I do hope this "more" helps ;)