Carlton Pearson - By Gary Hand
Carlton Pearson is a high profile religious leader, recording artist and political aspirant who is now entangled in a doctrinal controversy of his own creation. Previously deeply allied and involved in the Word of Faith Charismatic throng, he has alienated himself from many in that system, not by his rejection of the charismatic, but by his championing of a different gospel. This gospel is his own version of the "Wider Mercy Doctrine", Universalism or, as he terms it, the "Gospel of Inclusion."
Carlton Pearson seemed to take his associates by surprise, when he announced that he held to those views. Since his fellow charismatics do not normally teach such a deviant doctrine, at least not in such a blatant manner, either they would have to change their teaching in order to conform to his, or they would have to ignore his doctrine and accept him on the basis of being a charismatic, or they would have to disavow what he teaches. Many have preferred the latter course, including his friend, T.D. Jakes, who is no paragon of theological clarity himself. No stranger to deviant doctrines and outrageous claims by its own leadership, even Oral Roberts University, Carlton Pearson's alma mater, was forced to take action and removed him from its board of directors. Precipitating a large exodus from his church and a drop in attendance to his Azusa Conferences, Carlton Pearson brought to the forefront the deep roots of error that were the core of his theology which he inherited from his earliest memories. His core beliefs came out of the Church of God in Christ, and the charismatic nature of his faith along with the adoption of a belief in continuing revelation from God provided his foundation of sand, in which a true theology was non-existent and would eventually lead to error of the highest type of heresy.
A talented and gifted individual in communications, music and leadership, Carlton Pearson desires to be at the pinnacle and in the forefront of his endeavors. His personality is such that he aspires to leadership, control and autonomy in his actions. His gifts are not wrong in themselves and the use of them is a benefit to ministry, but when his gifts are connected with his self-centered desire for preeminence and his radically flawed theology, doctrinal tragedy can be the only result.
MAJOR DOCTRINAL ISSUES
THE "GOSPEL OF INCLUSION"
What is so controversial about his new gospel? It isn't new at all, since it is basic to the core belief of all Universalist believers. It is the adoption of a Universalist belief that is the difficulty and the core of the heresy. His beliefs are as follows:
A. The death of Jesus Christ on the cross and His resurrection paid the price for all of humanity to have eternal life in heaven, without any requirement to repent of sins and receive salvation.
B. Belief in Jesus Christ, is not necessary for a person to go to heaven. Salvation is unconditional, granted by the grace of God to every human being.
C. It is presumed that all of humanity will have its destiny in heaven, whether they realize it or not.
D. All of humanity will go to heaven regardless of their religious affiliation, including those who believe in false religions or adopt any other form of religious persuasion, or who have no religious persuasion.
E. Only those who have "tasted of the fruits" of real intimacy with Christ and have "intentionally and consciously rejected" the grace of God will spend eternity separated from God.
F. There are persons in some type of hell, but the emphasis is "to get away from the picture of an angry, intolerant God. I don't see God that bitter."
In a brief article, designed to give an overview of his theory, titled, Jesus: The Savior of the World, Carlton Pearson begins with three quotes, designed to bolster his authority to present his theory and at the same time intimidate those who would reject it outright or not even consider its content. He quotes John Milton, indicating that those who do not accept or consider his theory are lacking in knowledge, but those who are good men, like himself, present opinions, which are "knowledge in the making." He quotes Thomas Watson, indicating that people who refuse to discuss the issue have a personal opinion that they value more than truth, insinuating that his view is the truth. He quotes J. Drummond, implying that those who are not willing to reason with him about his theory are bigots. Finally, he quotes Oswald Chambers, implying that his detractors try to limit God by their reason, and since he is on a higher level, his belief transcends reason, just as does God. So, he begins the presentation of his doctrine with a fusillade of affronts to those who might disagree with him, hoping that a good offense is the best defense.
However, Carlton Pearson did not choose the sources of his quotations well, because John Milton, Thomas Watson and Oswald Chambers would have vehemently opposed his new doctrine, and his designation of J. Drummond as living in the era of the Civil War would mean that the author rose from the dead, because it was Sir William Drummond (1770-1828) who gave the quote in his Academical Questions. If Carlton Pearson has approached his new doctrine with the same imprecise and faulted study that he used in assigning his quotes, then it is no wonder that he is adrift in a sea of error.
THE NATURE OF GOD
Carlton Pearson's difficulty begins with a flawed concept of God in relation to man. In presenting aberrant doctrines, the attempt is always made to define the nature and character of God as less than who He is, and to raise the level of the nature and character of man to a position which he is not entitled. A wrong view of God leads to a wrong view of Jesus Christ, a wrong view of the Holy Spirit and eventually to a wrong view of the elements of salvation.
Through his claim that the God, traditionally believed by orthodox Christians, is a bitter God, Carlton Pearson sets up a "straw man" argument or a false premise, against which he argues and makes his claims. He does the same by defining the reason for God's anger being bitterness on His part, which is a human characteristic but not one of God. He wishes to disassociate himself from those who he claims believe in this "bitter God" that he created, for sake of argument, "to get away from the picture of an angry, intolerant God. I don't see God that bitter." Choosing his words poorly, he intimates that he actually does believe in a "bitter" God, because to state that God is not "that bitter" is to assume that He is bitter to a lesser degree. Orthodox belief would deny that God is bitter and would state that a bitter God has never been a tenant of true Christian doctrine. In setting up his false argument, he makes a claim against orthodox belief that is not true, and at the same time places himself in a position where he affirms, by his own words, that he accepts a belief in a bitter god who is just not "that bitter."
He seems to believe that God's intolerance of sin and consequent anger expressed against it, as taught in the Bible and found in orthodox belief, is equated with bitterness. By his acceptance of a bitter God himself, he assigns to God a deviant human characteristic which is the result of a fallen nature, and at the same time denigrates the character and integrity of God by assuming that He acts on the same level as human beings.
Carlton Pearson, by an ever-so-subtle method, begins to teach about a different God than is found in the Bible. He teaches about a God who is less than is His Holy nature, and by just a slight degree, is closer to the nature of humanity than the Bible reveals. So the character and nature of God is lessened by that small step which will lead to a greater lessening of the character and nature of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, and a consequent vast change in the nature of salvation.
JESUS CHRIST
The question that is presented in Carlton Pearson's doctrine, which has been discussed and answered many times, is, "For whom did Christ die?" Carlton Pearson would answer that He died for every person in the world that ever lived and will ever live. At the same time he would claim that the death of Christ was also efficacious (effective) for every person in the world that ever lived and will ever live. By that claim, he then states that all men are saved and going to heaven as a result of the death and resurrection of Christ, regardless of their religious view, even if they do not know or believe in Jesus Christ.
However, in his theology, the majority of human beings, who are saved and going to heaven, are second class persons in the heavenly scheme of things, because those who are a "Born-Again Believer" and are the "sanctified" individuals through a specific belief in Jesus Christ, are also "set apart to and for special service, ranking and relationship both with and to The Lord Jesus Christ...," which he claims is taught in 1 Corinthians 1:2. (This is strikingly similar to the The Trip To Heaven dream that Jesse Duplantis claimed to have, in which there are two categories of Christians, where the weaker ones must smell the leaves of the Tree of Life in order to get strength.) So, his theology becomes apparent: salvation is given to every human being, unconditionally through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, because, a personal relationship or faith in Jesus Christ is not necessary to obtain salvation. However, sanctification, or the setting apart to a higher ranking, is accomplished by a specific belief and relationship with Jesus Christ. This is the absolute reverse of orthodox belief. Since Carlton Pearson claims to have this belief and relationship with Jesus Christ, he presumes to be set apart, ranked higher and anointed to a higher level than the normal, every day person who is simply going to heaven on a scholarship.
SALVATION
The difficulty in Carlton Pearson's theology is that it turns salvation on its head. He claims that salvation is granted to every human being, unconditionally. This salvation is granted at birth, because the ultimate destination of every human being is presumed to be heaven. Even those who believe in another religion or another god are saved; they just don't know it.
The death of Christ made it possible for God to accept sinful man, and that he has, in fact, done so. Consequently, whatever separation there is between man and the benefits of God's grace is subjective in nature and exists only in man's mind and unregenerate spirit. The message man needs to hear then, is not that he simply has a suggested opportunity for salvation, but that through Christ he has, in fact, already been redeemed to God and that he may enjoy the blessing that are already his through Christ.
---Carlton Pearson, Jesus: The Savior of the World
Even though the Bible states that man is estranged from God and requires redemption through belief in Jesus Christ, John 3:18, Carlton Pearson claims that this estrangement is only in the mind of man and that all man needs to do is realize that he is already saved, rather than needing to be saved. As a result of this view, Carlton Pearson states that Romans 5:12-21 supports his belief, claiming that the apostle Paul taught the gospel of Universal Reconciliation. He then claims that faith in Jesus Christ does not accomplish salvation, but brings about sanctification, or the setting apart of a person from the rest of the crowd who are going to heaven. So, the object of faith is still Jesus Christ, but the purpose is not to secure salvation but to obtain sanctification. He teaches that belief in Jesus Christ, or being "Born again," gives a person special status and an exalted position over other persons. This is a major difference between his belief and orthodox belief. It is at the point of salvation that Carlton Pearson departs from the faith and proceeds to define, on his own terms, the means by which salvation can be obtained. He says that salvation is granted by God through means of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to all human beings, even though they may not know or even care about the events. Salvation, in his theological system, is unknown to the majority of human beings, but they are saved just the same. He claims that those human beings who do learn about Jesus Christ and are consequently "Born again," receive sanctification and not salvation, because they have already been saved through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The salvation claimed by Carlton Pearson is simply a given entity. It is possessed by every human being without their knowledge. However, this is not what the Bible teaches. Salvation is not possessed by default, but is obtained in a specific manner, by a process which may be slow or quick, but it is a process of obtaining knowledge about Jesus Christ:
"You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." 2 Timothy 3:14-15 Apostle Paul
"But what does it say? 'The word is near you, in your moth and in your heart' --that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 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 10:8-10 Apostle Paul
The apostle Paul teaches a different message regarding salvation than does Carlton Pearson. Paul did not preach a gospel of universal reconciliation applied to all, but a specific gospel to be universally preached to all. The difference is quite profound. The gospel of Universal Reconciliation is not the gospel taught by the apostle Paul. Salvation, according to the apostle Paul, is not automatically granted and is not possessed by people from birth. Salvation must be found and it is obtained through faith in Jesus Christ. It is at the point of faith that it is granted, not by default or by inheritance.
Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)- remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. Ephesians 2:11-13 Apostle Paul
The apostle Paul was teaching a radically different gospel than that claimed by Carlton Pearson. The apostle Paul was teaching that those Christians, who were Gentiles, had formerly been separate from Christ, without hope and without God while in the world. They did not have salvation until they were brought near through the blood of Christ. The same view is taught by the apostle Paul in Ephesians 4:18. The gospel of Universal Reconciliation is not taught by the apostle Paul and the claim that he does teach such a doctrine is false.
What Carlton Pearson teaches is a different means of salvation, provided in a different manner, than is found in traditional orthodox belief or in the Bible. The grace of God in salvation is redefined to be the granting of it to all human beings. Faith is redefined as applying to sanctification and not to salvation. Faith is not necessary to obtain salvation in his theological system because it is automatically provided by God to every human being. Everything changes in the gospel of Carlton Pearson. God is less than He is, grace is devalued, faith is not directed to the saving work of Jesus Christ on the cross and as such, the Jesus Christ of his theology is not the Jesus Christ of the Bible.
In Carlton Pearson's theology, if Christ died for every person in the world that ever lived or that will ever live, then His death and resurrection must have been efficacious for all of those individuals. In other words, they were all saved at the point of His death and resurrection, when the penalty for their sins was paid. Since this must be the case, if Christ died for every person in the world, then what accounts for his claim that some who were saved when Christ died and rose from the dead for them, lose that salvation at a future date? He presumes that those who have "tasted of the fruits" of a real relationship and intimacy with Jesus Christ and have "intentionally and consciously rejected" that relationship and grace, will spend eternity separated from God. The reality is, that in Carlton Pearson's doctrine, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ was not sufficient to secure salvation for every person in the world, and, in fact, He died and rose again for people who have salvation for a time in their life, but reject it and will not be saved when all is said and done. So, by definition, they were not granted a universal salvation by God and were not saved, since they are separated from God at their death. Salvation is no salvation if it does not actually save. Carlton Pearson redefines and devalues salvation to mean simply going to heaven. In that context, it is easy to lose salvation, since it is just the act of going to heaven. However, in orthodox belief, going to heaven is a fringe benefit of the act salvation, which is a reconciliation of man to God. Salvation is much more than just going to heaven, and, as such, salvation is truly what the term signifies; being kept secure by God Himself. It is a difficult concept to claim that Jesus Christ died for those who deliberately reject His placement of salvation on their lives. However, this goes very well with most charismatic belief, because it is a common thread in those doctrinal systems that salvation can be lost at any point. Just how a person is supposed to know at what specific point that occurs, is not specified.
In his theological system, human beings have no say or control over being granted a universal salvation by God. It is given without their knowledge or consent. However, human beings obtain control over the possession of their salvation if they are told the gospel message (as Carlton Pearson defines it) and reject it after having "tasted of the fruits" of a relationship with Jesus Christ, whatever that is defined to be. For the majority of people in Carlton Pearson's theological system, God is sovereign in their salvation, in that they are going to heaven whether they know it or not, even if they might reject that destination if they were told. For the others, who have been told the gospel and "tasted of the fruits" of a relationship with Jesus Christ and rejected that message, they are able to break God's sovereignty over their eternal destination and take for themselves the ability to determine their own destiny. The question must be asked, "Is God sovereign or is man sovereign?" In Carlton Pearson's theology, man is sovereign, because what God gives to man can be rejected by man. Man becomes the master and God becomes the victim. At one point, God grants salvation, but at another point that salvation has no effect and the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is pointless, and is powerless to maintain the salvation given.
Even in his own theological system, it would be better if Carlton Pearson would stop preaching his gospel, because the person who does not hear his gospel will not have the opportunity to reject the message and be separated from God as the result. If they do not hear the gospel and reject it, they will go to heaven. Preaching Carlton Pearson's gospel to a person, is, in reality, doing that person a disfavor by presenting to them the option of choosing to be separated from God. Truly, in his theological system, ignorance is bliss, because to be without a knowledge of Jesus Christ will assure a person of a place in heaven. Again, what Carlton Pearson claims is the opposite of orthodox belief and what the Bible actually says. Salvation, according to the Bible, is obtained by hearing the gospel and placing faith in Jesus Christ, while damnation is not to hear the gospel or reject the gospel.
In Carlton Pearson's theology, God grants salvation to every human being on an unconditional basis. The granting of sanctification is conditional, based on the choice of the individual. So, the major aspect, which is salvation is unconditional, while the minor aspect, sanctification, is conditional. In higher education, one spends the majority of time on their major, or the chief area of their study, and the minority of their time on their minor, or the secondary area of their study. In this theology, the major becomes the minor, the minor becomes the major and the individual majors on the minor element, which is sanctification. God and Jesus Christ have gone to the limit in order to provide salvation for humanity, but in this system it is simply granted, even to those who are ignorant of its provisions. But at the minor point of the issue, that of sanctification, the choice is given to continue in the belief or choose separation from God. The great work of Jesus Christ in His death and resurrection is relegated to an insignificant part of the life of a person, while the work of the Holy Spirit in bringing about sanctification is elevated to the major portion of a person's life to such a degree that a person's decision on that more minor element determines whether a person will be separated from God or will go to heaven. This is a theological system turned upside down in which a person is forced to major on the minors and minor on the majors.
The glaring fault in Carlton Pearson's teaching is that he creates two classes of people who are going to heaven. There are the ordinary people, who have never heard of Jesus Christ or have another religious belief, and there are the "sanctified" persons who have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and are set apart to a higher level. The difficulty is apparent, in that the first class of people are going to heaven in the same spiritual condition in which they live on this earth. Nothing has changed, because they are ignorant of Jesus Christ, believe in other false religious systems or have no religious belief at all. The Holy Spirit has never worked in their lives and they have never been spiritually changed in order to conform to the image of Jesus Christ.
Carlton Pearson has a gross misconception regarding the elements of salvation. Salvation is not about just going to heaven. If a person could obtain salvation without sanctification, then heaven would be filled with the same sinful, reprobate people in their same sinful reprobate condition, that inhabit this world, which is what his new theology allows. In Carlton Pearson's theology, not only is the method by which salvation is obtained redefined, the nature and composition of salvation itself is redefined and the elements of that salvation are detached from each other. Carlton Pearson assumes that salvation is going to heaven, but there is much more to it than just going to a pleasant place when one dies. Even if there was no such place such as heaven, salvation would still be a necessity because the issue of salvation is about the reconciliation of human beings to God, from whom they are separated. Reconciliation is not accomplished by going to heaven, but by means of the elements of salvation in which God demands accountability by man to the provision made by Jesus Christ by His death and resurrection, through faith, repentance, regeneration, justification, adoption and sanctification, those elements being accomplished through the work of the Holy Spirit. These elements constitute the totality of salvation and cannot be separated. It is not possible to obtain salvation without accomplishing sanctification, just as it is not possible to enter heaven without all of the elements being accomplished in the life of the believer.
Salvation, in the Scriptures, is granted as a result of faith; that faith being exercised toward the person and work of Jesus Christ on the cross and His subsequent resurrection. Faith has always been the means by which salvation was granted, even in the Old Testament, as Hebrews chapter 11 shows. To accept Carlton Pearson's view of salvation is to conclude that one possesses salvation by virtue of simply being human. Presumably if one is born, one has salvation. That is the disaster in his theology. To presume that one has salvation, when one does not, is be lost and damned to an eternity in hell, without the presence of God. Heresy leads to damnation, because to preach a wrong gospel about salvation is to preach a damning message to those who would believe it.
According to Carlton Pearson, the orthodox Christian church has gotten the salvation message all wrong for 1900 years and he has finally been the one to discover the truth and set everyone and everything straight. In a sense, he is maintaining the old apostasy theory that claims the early church believed one thing, but at some point that belief was changed and the church became apostate. He has now come along to end that system of apostasy and restore the truth of the real gospel as he has discovered it. "The Apostle Paul, whose teachings were the first to be referred to as heresies in Acts 24:14, was the first to teach the message of Universal Reconciliation, as he tried to convince Jews and Jewish Christians that the Gospel was inclusive of all of Humankind and not confined to a so-called 'faithful few.'" Subtly trying to compare his situation with the apostle Paul, he intimates that the claims of heresy brought against his teachings are similar to those in Acts. However, he misrepresents the charges of heresy brought against Paul, because they were not charges from within the Christian community, but from the old Judaistic religious system that was abolished on the death of Jesus Christ.
"A careful study of early church history will show that the doctrine of universal reconcilliation was the prevailing doctrine of the Primitive Christian Church." It is clear from the Scripture that this was not the prevailing doctrine of the early church. To claim otherwise is simply a perversion of the Scriptural record and the historical record as well. Carlton Pearson's approach is mirrored by the claims of Joseph Smith in Mormonism, who is considered to be "The prophet of the restoration," John Thomas of the Christadelphians and Charles Taze Russell of the Jehovah's Witnesses, who all claim that the Christian church has been wrong all along, but they and they only, by their own brilliance or by a revelation uniquely given to them, have discovered the truth. The absurdity of Carlton Pearson's claim, according to his own system of theology, is, it does not matter what a person believes; they are going to heaven anyway. So, even if the orthodox church got the message wrong, everyone is still going to heaven. In point of fact, it is not even necessary for there to be preachers to give a message, a church to attend or a religious belief to hold, since all men are going to heaven regardless of what they may or may not believe. If Carlton Pearson were true to his theology, he would have to admit that his job as a pastor or evangelist is completely unnecessary.
Carlton Pearson wishes to preach about a kinder, gentler God than is actually revealed in the Scripture. He wishes to redefine God in a manner that suits the message that he wishes to preach, rather than reveal the true character and nature of God. He wishes to do the same with Jesus Christ, so he states, "It is my objective to simply re-present Jesus in a softer and more loving way, being less excluding and more 'inclusive' in His love, tolerance, acceptance, and glorious promise to all."
Redefining God in the image of Carlton Pearson is his goal, in order to present a gospel that people want to hear. It is a gospel in which they can go to heaven just like they are. It is a gospel in which people are presumed to be worthy of heaven in the condition that they find themselves. It is a gospel in which they can excel to higher levels through the message of sanctification by faith, never dealing with the sin and depravity in their soul.
Carlton Pearson is adopting a gospel that is strangely reminiscent of Robert Schuller and his positive thinking theology. Robert Schuller took a survey and asked people what message they wanted to hear. They told him what it was, and he now preaches the comforting homilies of a positive self-image and high self-esteem. Salvation, according to Robert Schuller, is the adoption of a gospel of self-love, a positive self-image and high self-esteem that is sufficient to approach God. This is a gospel of arrogance, presuming that a person has the right to stand before God based on their own definition of adequacy. Claiming that the apostle Paul taught a negative message, Robert Schuller states that he does not preach the message of the apostle Paul. He takes upon himself the authority to determine what is important to preach from the Bible, and, as such, he places himself in a greater position of authority than God, who is the author of all Scripture.
Carlton Pearson has adopted Robert Schuller's popular approach, wishing to eliminate from his theology what he considers to be a negative message. My posture and position is that far fewer persons would be inclined to reject Jesus were He presented closer to how He presented Himself as He walked among men on the planet earth. He was a magnet for sinners, as they were drawn to Him by His Love, as seen in Luke 15:1-7... But it was those same sinners, the ones who had all their diseases healed, and their bellies filled with food through the miracles of Jesus Christ, who demanded that He be hung on a cross and the thief, Barabbas, released to them instead. At the point that Jesus Christ confronted their sin and the condition of their soul, demanding a spiritual response to His presence, His popularity ended and their hatred of what Jesus Christ taught began.
Though I strongly believe in the scriptural basis of the message of judgment and some kind of expression of hell, of late, in an attempt to inspire my own congregation to a greater sense of evangelism, I've been encouraging them to begin to emphasize more of the James 2:13 admonition that "mercy will triumph over judgment." Ultimately, God's answer to hell is Calvary-that's the Good News. Not too sure about hell and the message of judgment associated with it, Carlton Pearson takes a verse out of context, attempting to apply it to the ultimate mercy of God in granting salvation. James 2:13 has nothing to do with the mercy of God or the teaching that it will ultimately triumph. It is the person whose life is characterized by one of mercy who will be ready on the day of judgment by God. Why Carlton Pearson would claim that the message, "that mercy will triumph over judgment," is a greater inspiration to evangelism than the true gospel message, that repentance of sins and the acceptance of Jesus Christ as Savior will deliver a person from the judgment of God, is hard to understand. However, when salvation is given to every human being at birth, there is not much of any other message that can be preached.
Placing himself in the position of authority over the message of the gospel established by God, he assumes that he has the power to redefine God, Jesus Christ and salvation in the manner that best suits his true ultimate goal of extending the boundaries of his ministry. His "new" doctrine came about, not as a result of a desire to present doctrinal purity, but in order to extend the appeal of his ministry to a vast group of people who do not wish to hear or know about a gospel in which sin must be realized and confessed in their lives. As such, he teaches a gospel that says, "I'm ok. You're ok. We're all ok." To that end, Carlton Pearson has created his own gospel, just as Robert Schuller has created his. He is taking a calculated risk, willing to lose some followers now in order to appeal to a greater number as time goes on.
Carlton Pearson wishes to see himself as the leader of a new theological approach, redefining God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, salvation and sanctification. He looks to himself as the head of the movement and to others in order to provide a foundation for his beliefs, pointing toward those who call themselves "Universal Reconciliationists," with similar views. He uses the trendy terminology, that is so overused in charismatic circles today, that is supposed to assign a high level of importance and intellectual credence to what is being stated, indicating that a "paradigm shift" in thinking identifies his theological system, hoping to convince other people that he is doing great and mighty things.
Paradigm shifts, no matter how they are defined by their proponents, must adhere to the teachings in the Scripture, otherwise, like Carlton Person's "new" theology, they are simply the old heresies wrapped in another package.
No false prophet can be successful unless he has a following, and followers are culpable when they make no attempt to verify the truthfulness of their leader against the truth of the Scripture and, as a consequence, they deceive themselves.
END OF ARTICLE
by Gary A. Hand
On Doctrine
Copyright© IAmForSure.com 2003-2021 AD All rights reserved