It is not particularly difficult to walk through a sun filled garden with a casual acquaintance, but in times of calamity, we desperately search for a true brother. Indeed, the strength of a relationship is best measured in the midst of adversity, which is also true within corporate entities (e.g., families, communities, organizations), such as the Body of Christ.
Some of the most inspirational stories in scripture are portraits of God’s people manifesting genuine faith in the midst of extraordinary adversity (e.g., Job, Joseph, Daniel, Shadrach-Meshach-Abednego, John the Baptist, Stephen), while some of its most ardent warnings center around those whose character fails in the critical moment (e.g., Balaam, Saul, Solomon, the rich young ruler, Judas, Ananias-Sapphira).
Adversity does not necessarily build character, but it almost always exposes it. Sadly, the true character of what identifies as “the church” in America has been repeatedly exposed in recent decades. This litany of failures speaks to both a weak connection to the Lord, and to each other.
Though religious leaders from various denominations had much to say when allegations of sexual abuse within the Catholic church first emerged, the chorus has diminished significantly in recent years, as eerily similar scandals have rocked the evangelical and charismatic movements. To a lost and dying world, there is no discernable difference in these instances.
The word that is most often interpreted as “church” within the scripture refers to a people who have been called out by God. It was never intended to rest upon a building or an institution. Though there is a legitimate corporate expression of this group, scripture points to a living, breathing organism; not an inanimate, man-made object or system.
But instead, we have created an industry called, “The Church”, and we’ve slapped Jesus’ name on our letterheads, and buildings, much like a corporate sponsor does on a stadium. Unfortunately, any system that men create is highly susceptible to corruption and abuse, and that has become the legacy of this guarded religious paradigm.
The Lord spoke to me some years ago about “Institutions,” and said, “institutions are created by man, and they are not sacred to Me”. He showed me that it is the people who inhabit these institutions that are precious to Him. But the men who create and promote such entities are more apt to protect the institution at the expense of people, which clearly opposes the Lord’s value system.
When an institution becomes a conduit for manipulation, abuse and destruction, it has completely perverted God’s design and desire. If a branch that does not produce fruit is cut off and thrown into the fire (John 15:6), what is the fate of branches that produce poisonous fruit.
Nothing seemed to stir Jesus’ ire like the religious leaders of His day, and the scripture is filled with stories of their ignorance and arrogance. But sadly, almost no one seems to see themselves in those stories, as the religious leaders of today continue to blindly walk into many of the same traps.
A clear pattern of failure was demonstrated by Israel’s very first King. Saul did not promote himself to the position of king, nor was he nominated by his peers, he was literally picked out of the crowd (1Sam.9:17) and chosen by God (1Sam.10:24). At that time, he was humble (1Sam.9:21), anointed (1Sam.10:1), gifted (1Sam.10:13), and God had done a work in his heart (1Sam.10:9). And for a substantial period, Saul walked in that calling and anointing (i.e. 1Sam.11), fulfilling God’s purposes in his life.
But, sustained seasons of victory, and the praise of men eventually eroded Saul’s humility to the point that he felt empowered (or commissioned) to make decisions of his own (1Sam.15:9). It wasn’t as if he stopped wanting to serve God, but his pride and greed caused him to overstep the bounds of his authority.
God’s response was quick and definitive (1Sam.15:11 & 23), and it’s hard not to see the parallel between his story and the narratives surrounding so many “anointed” (i.e. called, gifted, empowered) ministry leaders who’ve fallen throughout church history, especially in the recent past.
At the point David refused to lay his hands on “God’s anointed one” (1Sam.24:10), it was clear to him and everyone else that Saul had been rejected as the king of Israel. This passage is pointing towards David’s unwillingness to act without specific direction from the Lord, which is a foreshadowing of Jesus’ pledge that He couldn’t do anything without direct guidance from the Father. It is meant as an advocation of David’s heart, not a defense of Saul’s immutable position or calling.
Nothing in scripture supports the idea that calling, gifting, anointing… exempts a person from accountability. Indeed, quite the opposite is true (1 Tim.5:20, James 3:1). Within these stories, we see Samuel soundly rebuke Saul (1Sam.15:17-19), just as Nathan strongly rebukes David for his transgression with Bathsheba (2Sam.12:1-7). Chastening a king was a dangerous activity, even for a recognized prophet, but it was exactly what God called them to do.
A related aspect revealed in David’s story occurs toward the end of his reign, when he wants to build the temple. As he inquires of the prophet Nathan, he’s told that God is with him, and that he should do as he pleases (2Sam.7:3). There is nothing recorded that indicates that Nathan inquired of the Lord for this answer, and it appears to have come from his experience of being alongside David as he wins battle after battle.
It was a completely reasonable conclusion to draw, and on the surface, it seemed true, as God clearly was with David. But when Nathan takes the time to inquire of the Lord (2Sam.7:4), the answer is much different than he or anyone else expected.
This phenomenon is frequently played out in the modern context, as truly gifted people, who have eyes to see, are blinded by someone’s position, title, resume, success, giftings, callings, anointing… Like these prophets, they may have been called by God to confront issues, but they defer to what they see with their natural senses, or what they perceive to be a higher authority.
Nathan’s rebuke allowed David to repent, and to step back into the fullness of his calling. It’s hard not to believe that God hasn’t extended this same grace to so many other ministers who fell because no one was willing to confront them as they veered off course. Unfortunately, we have created a culture that struggles to tolerate such a confrontation.
Even when abusive leaders are uncovered, there seems to be an inappropriate sense of urgency to “restore” them to ministry. If we view these situations through the lens of a fallen brother (or sister), our concern should be about the restoration of their relationships with both the Lord and their loved ones. But when viewed through the lens of the church industry, it’s bad for business to have your most valuable players on the sideline, so the focus tends to be on getting them back on the field.
When people see ministries that are particularly successful, they are prone to elevate the ministers and their organizations to a place that God has reserved for Himself (i.e. our source, our covering, our provision). Regardless of the good work that has been, and/or is being done within a ministry, this still amounts to Idolatry. And while unquestioned loyalty to a man or ministry may be good for business, it can ultimately stir the resistance of God. In such cases, both the minister and the people bear some responsibility for establishing and preserving this relational dynamic.
The fact that people fall into sin is not surprising nor does it need to be traumatic to the whole body. The catastrophic damage is done when we turn a blind eye to these failures, and/or endeavor to cover them up. This further crushes the victims, violates the trust of the affected community, and empowers the abusers. The rationalization is that we are somehow mitigating the damage done to the “Body,” but in truth, it’s about protecting the entity (i.e., the minister, the ministry, the organization…) and its interests.
It is not wrong that organizations aspire to build a track record of effectiveness, but when protecting the brand becomes more important than protecting the people who inhabit the group, significant damage is inevitable. It begins subtly, as a disparity develops between the picture presented in front of the stakeholders, and the reality of what goes on behind the scenes. The longer that gap is allowed to exist and grow, the greater the depths to which an entity is bound to fall.
While we may rationalize that the prosperity of the brand benefits everyone, an institution’s legacy is ultimately rooted in how they treat their people. God’s perspective always boils down to the treatment of “the least of these (Matt.25:40).”
Bjcorbin's Blog 
The Way
Posted in Commentaries, tagged admonish, anti-christ, authority, champion, connection, deceive, deception, discern, embodiment, end times, eternal, eternity, evoke, exchange, fix our eyes, focus, genuine, hate, illusion, image, influence, Jesus name, kingdom, life, manifest, Sceva, seen, Spirit, spiritual, substitute, temporal, transform, truth, unseen, warning, way on September 25, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The danger of living in the social media age is that we can gather a following of like-minded folks, spend our days shouting into the echo chamber, and cancel anyone who dares to disagree with us. Devoid of any contrasting perspective, it’s easy to deceive ourselves into believing that our perceptions have become reality. And with the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI), we can be sure that our electronic feed will remain full of voices that endorse and reinforce our illusion.
While this type of pattern is unhealthy on many levels, it is most dangerous from a spiritual standpoint. Throughout the scripture we are warned against leaning on our own understanding (Prov.3:5-7), about the deceitfulness of our hearts (Jer.17:9), and of the great deceivers and deceptions that will be visited upon God’s people (Matt.24:24). We are cautioned against focusing on what is seen, as it is perishing (2Cor.4:18). And most importantly, we are told to fix our eyes on Jesus, who is the Author and Finisher of our faith (Heb.12:2).
I suspect that popular renderings of a singular “Anti-Christ” figure, from our depictions of the End Times, have clouded our understanding of the true spirit of anti-Christ, which manifests in many forms. While we’ve been taught to make bold declarations against such things, I have found that these spirits are not nearly as intimidated by our use of Jesus’ name as we might think. Like the sons of Sceva, the Chief Priest (Acts 19:13-16) or those people Jesus spoke of in Matthew 7:21-23, we can try to evoke His name while having no genuine connection to Him (John 15:5). In such instances, this word carries no spiritual authority.
Ultimately, attacking the authentic, life-giving connection to Christ is the aim of the anti-Christ spirit. It tries to redefine the “work of God” as being something other than believing in the One that He sent (John 6:29). It offers symbols and rituals and formulas and brokers as a substitute for a genuine one on one relationship with the person of God. It offers earthly prosperity and temporal gains as a substitute for genuine spiritual authority.
It encourages us to know ministers by their gifts instead of by their fruit (Matt.7:16). It fills the atmosphere with voices and things to look at, so that we don’t discern the still small voice of God (1Kings 19:11-13) or fix our gaze on the Giver of Life (Heb.12:2). It inspires religious leaders to build an earthly replica of the kingdom, so that the genuine Kingdom does not become manifest.
This spirit does not care that Jesus’ name is plastered all over our buildings, bumper stickers, t-shirts and letter heads, as long as we don’t look anything like Him (Rom.8:29). It does not oppose our gatherings, as long as people aren’t genuinely connecting with the Savior (or each other). It does not resist our endless Bible study, as long as the scripture remains little more than a tool for the rationalization of our own carnal interests (John 5:39-40). It is not against us viewing Jesus as a resource for strength, as long as cultivating an authentic relationship with Him never becomes the goal. In such cases, the inclusion of Jesus’ name actually lends a sense of legitimacy to the whole deception.
Evidence of this spiritual influence would be a people who call themselves “Christians” yet aren’t identifiable by their love and grace for one another (John 13:35); who aren’t concerned about the fact that they nor their leaders look or sound anything like Christ (Rom.8:29), and who are more concerned with current events (i.e., the seen realm) than eternity (i.e., the unseen realm) (2Cor.4:18). They would likely be a people who were known more for their divisions than their unity (Eph.4:4-6).
In the absence of Christ’s Lordship, such a people would be destined to idolize mere men, and likely to crown themselves an earthly king (1Sam.8). And apart from the guidance of Christ’s Spirit, they would be highly susceptible to hollow and deceptive philosophies, which depend on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world (Col.2:8).
It would be difficult to argue that this isn’t a fairly accurate portrait of Western Christianity.
There are so many scriptures that appear to be warnings for individuals who count themselves as believers, or followers, or even disciples. Passages referencing a people who possess a form of godliness but also deny the power thereof (2Tim.3:5), who honor Jesus with their lips, but whose hearts remain far from Him (Matt.15:8), and/or who will exchange God’s thoughts for the rhetoric that fuels their true passion (2Tim.4:3-4). Yet we can convince ourselves that these words don’t really apply to us because we are good and moral people, who hate what is evil and champion the proper value system.
Despite the fact that many Christians would say that we are fast approaching, or perhaps even living amid the “end times”, there seems to be little concern regarding the Lord’s admonishments to the churches in the book of Revelation. If we really believe His return is imminent, we should probably be mindful of what it looks like to forsake our first love for some other passion (Rev.2:1-7) and perhaps be on the lookout for the false prophets who threaten to lead us astray (Rev.2:18-29). We might also want to ponder what might cause Him to view us as “lukewarm” (Rev.3:14-22).
Jesus taught that He is the way, the truth and the life; and that there is no other path to the Father (John 14:6). But the anti-Christ spirit works diligently to separate our concept of these things from the person of Jesus. It invites us to fix our eyes on anything but Him. Unless Christ becomes the embodiment of our truth, we will never walk in the way He’s ordained for us, nor experience the life He died to give us.
Ultimately, God’s ways are much higher than our ways (Isa.55:8-9) and that pattern was so perfectly demonstrated by Christ that at the end of His life He was able to say that, if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the Father (John 14:9). Through this perfect reflection of the Father’s heart, Jesus became “The Way” for us (John 14:6), and now the only thing that keeps us from walking in that way is “the way that seems right” to us (Prov.14:12) instead.
Rate this:
Read Full Post »