About that “Jesus Calling” book . . .

Jesus Calling is an extremely popular book by Sarah Young.  That is sad, because it is transparently un-biblical.  You should be very skeptical of anyone who claims they got special revelation from God.  Those are nearly certain to be mischievous at best.

As always, as Justin Peters says, if you want to hear from God, read the Bible. If you want to hear from God audibly, then read the Bible out loud.  Trust God that his word will be sufficient for you, just as He promised.

Here is part a worthwhile review of Jesus Calling by Tim Challies.

We cannot miss this. As I have spoken to others about the book, I’ve heard some people say that this book is written as if Jesus is speaking to the reader. But it’s important to know that Young makes a far more audacious claim—this is Jesus speaking, through her. The messages he has given her, she now passes on to us.

This is a very good time to pause and consider this claim. Sarah is claiming some kind of new revelation from God. She is saying that God speaks to her and that she then passes these messages to others. Immediately we need to ask what she believes about the Bible. Is she claiming that these messages are equal to Scripture? That they trump Scripture?

She makes no such claim; not directly, anyway. At one point she says, “I knew these writings were not inspired as Scripture is, but they were helping me grow closer to God.” Later she says “The Bible is, of course, the only inerrant [without error] Word of God; my writings must be consistent with that unchanging standard.” But this is all she says. While she clarifies that her writings must be subservient to the Bible, she does not actually tell us what they are or how we are to regard them. Are they authoritative? Are they in any way binding on her or on us? If they are not inspired and not inerrant, what exactly are they? There are no answers forthcoming because immediately Young begins to share those words of God as daily devotionals, saying “I have continued to receive personal messages from God as I meditate on Him. The more difficult my life circumstances, the more I need these encouraging directives from my Creator.”

Young teaches that though the Bible is inerrant and infallible, it is insufficient.

James Montgomery Boice once said that the real battle in our times would not be the inerrancy or infallibility of Scripture, but its sufficiency—are we going to rely on the Bible or will we continually long for other revelation? In Jesus Calling we see this so clearly. Young teaches that though the Bible is inerrant and infallible, it is insufficient. It was not enough for her and, implicitly, she teaches that it cannot be enough for us. After all, it was not reading Scripture that proved her most important spiritual discipline, but this listening, this receiving of messages from the Lord. It is not Scripture she brings to us, not primarily anyway, but these messages from Jesus.

On this basis alone this book is very suspect and needs to be treated with the utmost care. Young offers us words that she insists come straight from the Lord. But she gives no proof that we should expect the Lord to speak to us this way; all she offers is her own experience of it. At this point we are left with a few options. We can stop reading altogether, we can continue to read while rejecting her claims that these are words from the Lord, or we can read and take her at her word. Personally, unless reviewing the book, I would abandon it immediately. If she claims to be speaking Jesus’ words, I am no longer interested. However, for the sake of reviewing it, I continued to read.

WHAT SHE SAYS

Young offers a years’ worth of devotionals, all of which are written in the first person, as messages from Jesus. Each of them is followed with a few Scripture passages. Here is the first half of the devotional for January 8:

Softly I announce my Presence. Shimmering hues of radiance tap gently at your consciousness, seeking entrance. Though I have all Power in heaven and on earth, I am infinitely tender with you. The weaker you are, the more gently I approach you. Let your weakness by a door to My Presence. Whenever you feel inadequate, remember that I am your ever-present Help.

It is interesting that the majority of the devotionals are affirmations rather than commandments which means that the book tends to be more descriptive than prescriptive. It is less about Jesus telling how we are to live, but more about who he is, who we are, and how to enjoy his Presence. It is notable that these affirmations span only a very narrow range of the Christian experience. It is equally notable that many of Jesus’ words sound very little like what he says in the Bible. For example, “Let the Light of My Presence soak into you, as you focus your thoughts on Me.” And shortly after, “Learn to hide in the secret of My Presence, even as you carry out your duties in the world.” I do not even know what that means or how it might be applied. There is no clear command there for me to obey and no clear word about who Jesus is.

CONCLUSION

Jesus Calling is, in its own way, a very dangerous book. Though the theology is largely sound enough, my great concern is that it teaches that hearing words directly from Jesus and then sharing these words with others is the normal Christian experience. In fact, it elevates this experience over all others. And this is a dangerous precedent to set. I see no reason that I would ever recommend this book.

One of my all-time favorite lessons to teach is Decision Making and Will of God.  It also addresses these alleged revelations from God.

If you really want to hear from Jesus, read the Bible.  It is open 24×7.

Update:

Some quotes from the book that prove the points above.

“Smith writes, “When looking at these quotes of ‘Jesus’ from Jesus Calling, ask yourself–do these statements sound like things our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ would say?” [1]

According to the fake “jesus” in the Sarah Young book:

“When you trustingly whisper My Name, My aching ears are soothed.” [2]

“When you walk through a day in trusting dependence on Me, My aching heart is soothed.” [3]

This is creepy. Let’s go on to a couple more quotes from the fake “jesus.”

“Feel your face tingle as you bask in My Love-Light.” [4]

“Let My gold-tinged love wash over you and soak into the depths of your being.” [5]

“Unlike the ‘Jesus’ of Jesus Calling who does so excessively, Jesus Christ never flattered people,” writes Warren B. Smith. [6]

I am going to review Smith’s full book, but I probably will have short articles along the way. ‘Another Jesus’ Calling is an important book as the popular Jesus Calling seems a product of spirit dictation, like its predecessor of the 1930s, God Calling.

 

Endnotes:

1. Warren B. Smith, ‘Another Jesus’ Calling, pg. 64

2. Sarah Young, Jesus Calling, pg. 203

3. Ibid., pg. 182

4. Ibid., pg. 262

5. Ibid., pg. 310

6. Warren B. Smith, ‘Another Jesus’ Calling, pg. 65

Advertisements

49 thoughts on “About that “Jesus Calling” book . . .”

  1. The other dangerous thing about these books is that they seem to portrary Christianity as experiential – all about what we experience – and they are highly emotional. This only contributes to the already dangerous trend in the church away from Christianity as objective Truth and toward Christianity as an emotional salve and God as a Heavenly Psychiatrist who is there to make us feel better.

    Like

  2. I’d have to read the book for myself to come up with any real criticism. In and of itself nothing in the New Testament indicates that a Believer cannot hear from God. She already disclaimed that she was not authoring any new or authoritative scriptures, and if nothing she wrote contradicts the scriptures, then what exactly is the problem?

    Like

    1. I’ve read reviews of the book from a few trustworthy sources, and all agree that there are many problems with Young’s book, even beyond her claims of direct Revelation.

      I suggest that you peruse these, as well as the full review by Challies:
      http://thecripplegate.com/the-jesus-calling/
      http://www.solasisters.com/2013/09/jesus-calling-by-sarah-young-wui.html
      http://steakandabible.com/2012/07/04/is-deception-calling-a-review-of-jesus-calling-by-sarah-young/
      http://the-end-time.blogspot.com/2012/09/sarah-young-was-it-really-jesus-calling.html
      http://standupforthetruth.com/2012/07/is-jesus-calling-a-wrong-number-book-review/
      http://www.donotbesurprised.com/2011/06/jesus-calling.html

      What she writes DOES contradict Scripture.

      Like

      1. Richard Graves, how about this: she says that what she is writing is the words of Jesus, yet she says it’s uninspired. Since the very definition of “inspired” as it relates to Scripture/Christianity means “God-breathed”, and since Jesus is God, it is impossible for Him to say anything that is not inspired. To put another way, she says that God said something that was not said by God, which is an impossibility.

        But if you want to read just one of the above links that Glenn provided, read the SolaSisters one [though I’ve not read the last two links yet — will be getting to them momentarily].

        Like

      2. Richard,

        Forgive my tardiness in responding – I have not been able to get much time on the computer today, having been out for several hours.

        Anyway, to respond to your request for “One direct contradiction” in Young’s book, in addition to the excellent point Kathy made above, how about this one, as cited at the Cripplegate:

        (July 8) “When you seek my face, put aside thoughts of everything else. I am above all, as well as in all;
        Young has Jesus saying He is “in all.” So that is what, panentheism? Does the Bible say that Jesus is “in all”? That he is in rocks and trees and even computer printer?

        I also think this paragraph by the Cripplegate shows that Young’s Jesus is not the Jesus of the Bible – a contradiction.
        Sarah Young’s Jesus does not sound anything like the Jesus of the Bible. In the gospels, Jesus has a profound depth to him. His words can be mined for content, cross references, and prophetic implications. There is a richness and depth to his words that make them unlike anything ever spoken before. They have a way of convicting the heart, and showing God to the world. They are not merely human words.

        Again from the Cripplegate:
        The entire book is troubling because it steers readers away from the sufficiency of Scripture. It teaches them that Bible reading is dry, but a personal word from the Lord is available. Young even writes, “the more difficult my life circumstances, the more I need these encouraging directives from my Creator.” I have been preaching verse-by-verse through Psalm 119, and that Psalm makes the point that the more difficult the circumstance, the more you need to rely on the truth of Scripture. It is evident that  Psalm 119′s attitude about Scripture is exactly contrary to Young’s.
        My emphasis.

        2 Peter 3: His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.
        BUT, Young contradicts this, when, as reported on the Sola Sister’s review, she says:
        I knew that God communicated with me in the Bible, but I yearned for more.
        THERE IS NO MORE! God had given us everything we need to know in the Scriptures.

        You asked for one, here are four.

        Like

      3. Glenn,

        Thanks for the follow up. The quote about her “personal revelations” being more important when life was difficult is a red flag to me. As if scripture wasn’t enough? She is clearly saying that she needed something more than the Bible.

        Like

      4. Glenn and Kathy, I am a theologian and a Bible scholar, I am on the conservative side of the fence theologically. Kathy, looking at your first objection “Richard Graves, how about this: she says that what she is writing is the words of Jesus, yet she says it’s uninspired. Since the very definition of “inspired” as it relates to Scripture/Christianity means “God-breathed”, and since Jesus is God, it is impossible for Him to say anything that is not inspired. To put another way, she says that God said something that was not said by God, which is an impossibility.” Come on, saying Jesus said something DIRECTLY to here and disclaiming that what she is sharing is not scripture does NOT meet the level of heresy you are trying to forward. Seems to me all I am seeing is a bias against full gospel believers who believe that the spiritual gifts, like prophecy, can be active in modern believers. Glenn, her saying “Jesus is in all”, in and of itself is not a admission or indication of “pantheism”, if anything it is hyperbole unless one is making some grand theological statement, I think you all are thinking entirely too hard about this. I don’t see this woman as saying “Thus say the Lord”… more of her sharing things about HER relationship with Christ.

        Like

  3. I think the real issue she is vague is because… it’s making her so much money! You know how we get, if we’re making a lot of money, it must be God’s blessings on our lives!

    Like

  4. My favorite devotionals are: One Day at a Time in Al-Anon, Courage to Change, Believing in Myself, and Streams in the Desert. I was thinking about picking up Jesus Calling and adding it to my collection. I tend to agree with Richard in that there is nothing in the New Testament that indicates a believer cannot hear from God. I would also like to add that the author has not claimed authority over anyone. Jesus Calling is not a book about theology. If you don’t like devotionals then fine, how is Jesus Calling different from other devotionals that point people to God’s word? So, Christians are not allowed to journal? They’re not allowed to share their experiences with the world? If that’s the case then how do we share our stories? No one has added to the bible. No one has said that God has stated something that He hasn’t shown us in his word. Jesus Calling is a devotional which is quite different from a book about Bible doctrine. Why do Christians have to pick each other apart? If you want to focus on a person or a group of people who have literally done damage maybe take a look at Westboro Baptist Church—a group of people who are truly UN-Christian. We have much bigger fish to fry.

    Like

  5. I have read all these comments, and haven’t seen ONE that is scripturally based. Bias based, denominationaly based, prejudice based, but not ONE verse of scripture to support the position taken.

    I think you are cultissh and unscriptural if you make the false assumption that the Bible is all we need from God – you are also hypocritical because every one of you has asked God for direction when you found nothing in scripture to answer your question.

    IF Scripture was all that God intended to ever say to man, there would be no need for the Holy Spirit, no need for prophets and apostles in the church, no need for the word of wisdom or the word of knowledge to have been ingrafted into the church, as the Bible clearly teaches – each of these provides revelation and direction that is in agreement, but not contained with the scripture. IF the scripture is everything we need, why was there prophesy given to the NT church, and if there was no risk of the prophesy being errant, why were we commanded to judge prophesy?

    You are also anti-historical. Down through the ages, the office and ministry of the prophet has been used to provide revelation and information to the church. As God promised in the OT, He would do nothing without revealing it ti his prophets first. One irrefutable example is the three hundred old prophesy given by a boy prophet to the Armenians, including maps and writings of a day of calamity they could avoid by moving to a strange land. It was another century or so before another prophet came to their village and told them they had a prophesy given to them many years previously, and this was the time to act. The map specifically directed they should move to California, and those that followed the prophesy avoided the Armenian genocide.

    Just one of many historical examples of the necessity and permanence of a prophet in the church – AS GOD PROMISED.

    Like

      1. Richard,
        I notice you didn’t even address three of my four examples.
        I’m certainly not impressed with your claim to be a theologian and a scholar – as if those reviewers I cited weren’t. All it tells me is that you are willing to accept nebulous feel-good quasi doctrinal statements in a “devotional book” as legitimate by making a claim about the continuing operation of the Holy Spirit.

        Well, I also believe in the continuing operation of the Spirit, but my belief is that anything claimed to be from the Spirit must line up with what we already have from the Spirit in the Bible.

        Young’s claims are more like the occult with her “automatic writing.” I find it disingenuous to say a person can claim she is getting this writing via direct revelation while at the same time saying it isn’t equivalent to Scripture, and that you find no problem with this. (By the way, I didn’t see where Kathy hinted that this was heresy as you charge). The problem is that it is a complete contradiction! “Hey, Jesus gave me a revelation, but it isn’t inspired.” What kind of double-talk is this?!?!?

        Paul,
        The citations I gave from reviewers did indeed reference Scripture. Your charges of us being cultic and unscriptural can be thrown right back at you. You provide no Scriptural support for anything Young has said or done.

        The Bible is all we need for understanding the faith, and for guidance, while the Holy Spirit provides the counsel to help us understand it. When we pray for assistance, our prayers are based on what we know about God from the Scripture; we aren’t seeking new revelations.

        IF the scripture is everything we need, why was there prophesy given to the NT church,
        Um, because the NT wasn’t written or gathered together yet?!?!

        and if there was no risk of the prophesy being errant, why were we commanded to judge prophesy?
        Because of false prophets! You know, like Sarah Young and her claims of direct revelation that really isn’t inspired. Or because of such people like Joseph Smith, E.G.White, or the current members of IHOP and NAR. Like the Benny Hinns and Paul Crouch’s. That’s why we are commanded to judge the prophesy.

        And I just love your anecdotes about why we are anti-historical; the story about the prophet to the Armenians. It reminds me of all the tales of Mary’s appearances and teachings promoted by the Romanist church! Legends aren’t history.

        Like

      2. Glenn, I didn’t address your four so-called examples because they appeared to be biased and willfully ignorant prima facie. I didn’t tell you that to “impress” you but to INFORM you, that your armchair theological musings about this book and that of the others you posted do not impress ME. It appears to me that you and your fellows are operating out of a prejudice predicated on your doctrine and tradition not so much an actually biblically based theological one. Take it however you will. Shalom and Laila Tov.

        Like

      3. Richard,
        And guess, what, I can say YOU are practicing your own bias against what you consider “armchair theological musings.” You are operating on a prejudice against those who challenge the absurd prophetic claims of all these johnny-come-lately “prophets” – you know, the kind that are allowed to have errors. Except in the Bible those prophets who had errors were stoned.

        I assure, my hermeneutics are based on what the Bible actually says rather on the eisegesis of those who promote the new false prophets and those who claim direct revelation from God. It is THOSE people who have the cult followings, which anyone with real theological scholarship can readily identify when they look at places like IHOP.

        Like

  6. I don’t always agree with Glenn, but in this case, I will let his comment speak for my thoughts as well, because it is basically what I would have said had he not.

    One thing I would add is, “Never read a Bible verse.” Yes, Amos 3:7 exists, but the context is speaking to the Israelites of that time, and not necessarily to all people at all times. You gave an anecdote which seems to confirm that this verse has a broader application; does that then mean that if I give an anecdote (or hundreds of anecdotes) which show calamities befalling God’s people without them being specifically forewarned, that that proves the Bible is false in this point, and therefore untrustworthy in all points? I daresay not! Therefore, your anecdote proves nothing, except to tell a nice story (which may not be truthful, but mere legend).

    Like

      1. Richard,

        Proper exegesis of Amos 3:7 demonstrates that the context is in regards to how God deals with Israel. It has nothing to do with N.T. Christians, let alone all the centuries since.

        Try properly exegeting Hebrews 1:1-2. I wonder why it says, “In the PAST” God spoke through prophets?

        I have no problem with there being current prophets of God, any more than I have a problem with other gifts of the Spirit. What I have a problem with are the claims to such gifts when the claims do NOT line up with Scripture.

        Like

      2. No Glenn, you are wrong. Simple as that, let me explain why (yeah, that pesky stuff I learned getting my Master Degrees in Theology and Biblical Studies you aren’t impressed by). 1. Yes, there is a proper occasion for Amos 3.7, Israel in rebellion, is there a greater theological principle that can be applied to the church for now. Yes. The God being spoken about, is the God of Israel which by mutual implication refers to the God of Christians, the Father of Jesus our Father. The prophet Amos stated quite simply: “Surely the Lord God will do NOTHING, until He reveal HIS Secret to His Servants the prophets”. If we are dealing with the same God and on occasion the same situations of rebellion and disobedience that Israel had as the Church, we can reasonably conclude that God is still doing things and still talking to His people (The Church) as He had in times past. In context with Ephesians 4.11, we are clear that the office of the Prophet still exist in the New Testament dispensation. Again, NOTHING in the New Testament says that a person will not hear from God DIRECTLY, in fact it says quite the contrary. So, unless this woman is trying to make scripture, which she clearly ISN’T, your issues seem to be more of a bias due to whatever brand of protestantism you subscribe to,

        Like

      3. Richard,
        
Well, so all those others with the same degrees you hold, who have a different understanding than you, just happen to be wrong? And all those people with the same degrees promoting the IHOP bunch, or liberal theological doctrines, etc, are to be trusted over the plain reading of the text?

        You are wrong. There is no justification for extrapolating Amos 3:7 to be for the Christian. No justification at all, just your assertion. (using your hermeneutical principle stated in your comment, then 2 Chron. 7:14 would have to apply to the United States – as many Christians claim by not understanding the context. And what about Jer. 29:11 – another well-known abused Scripture – do you see that for the Church also?

        I agree that the office of prophet was still in the original church, prior to the canon being closed, but afterwards anyone claiming to be a prophet must be tested against what Scripture says.

        Young claims to receive direct revelation from Jesus, while at the same time saying her revelation is not “inspired.” She can’t have it both ways. IF she claims her revelations are from Jesus, then they are de facto inspired revelations. Therefore, her claims must be judged to be false.

        And if she isn’t “trying to make Scripture” (contrary to her denials), then what other purpose is it serving to claim that what you are writing is direct revelation from Jesus? If a person claims direct revelation from Jesus (or God the Father) then they are de facto claiming authority for their revelations, which means anyone who disputes her would be guilty of disbelieving Christ! I find that to be quite presumptuous.

        You didn’t comment about my reference to the false prophets of IHOP and NAR making essentially the same claims as Sarah Young, only they go even farther with such claims. According to your “bias” pro-modern prophets, I’m wondering if you accept these guys’ claims? After all, as noted above, aren’t there members of that group who also have those theological degrees?

        My “brand of protestantism” is following what Scripture says, using proper hermeneutical principles.

        I have a bias and you have a bias. But the important thing is, which bias is the best bias to be biased by? I’d rather be biased towards the plain reading of Scripture than needing to practice eisegesis to force my belief system into it, which is what you have to do in order to make your claims for Amos 3:7, let alone trying to fit in Sarah Young’s claims of direct revelation.

        Like

      4. Lolol, seriously Glenn, now you are forwarding the same brand of anti-scholarship and anti-intellectualism that the people you’re criticizing (I.e. Hinn) forward. Yes there is a range of theological positions you can find in all subjects, however there is a general consensus amongst series scholars who look at these things objectively and contextually without the denominational doctrine prejudices you are forwarding. Yes, I’m sure you can find some so-called scholars out of your camp who have a problem with Hinn and the like who throw the baby out with the bathwater that focus so much on false prophets and false prophecy that they never take the time to learn about the proper application of such, or teach their people how to identify true prophets, true prophecy or even what these things are in the context of proper New Testament teaching. NOW, I will buy the lady’s book to see what it is actually saying, because so far all I see is you are applying bad exegesis and your personal prejudices.

        Like

      5. Richard,

        Oh, so now I’m “forwarding” a brand of anti-intellectualism?!?! Why is that? Because I made the point that there are others with your credentials who disagree with you? And that there are others with your credentials who are among the false prophets and false apostles of IHOP and NAR?

        You were using YOUR credentials as a way to prove me in error. I was merely pointing out that fallacy and then you accuse me of anti-intellectualism. Whoa!! Looks like I hurt someone’s ego!

        And of course there are “so-called” scholars if they happen to be in agreement with me. The ol’ “no true Scotsman” fallacy!

        I love that cliché about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Of course that assumes there is indeed a baby IN that bathwater, or that the “baby” isn’t a demon!

        they never take the time to learn about the proper application of such, or teach their people how to identify true prophets, true prophecy or even what these things are in the context of proper New Testament teaching.

        Oh, yes they do, which is why those of us who use discernment can smell false teachings a mile away. You are so enamored with your education that you turn off discernment and follow the crowd with all their false prophecies.

        Go ahead and buy the book (and you, too, Angela) and waste money. I trust the reviewers to accurately report and accurately cite the book, since I am familiar with their track records.

        Personally, I don’t let someone claiming revelation from Jesus to tell me anything. (Which is why I’m not a member of a cult). I’ll stick with the Bible and discerning teachers – you know, those other guys from seminaries with their theological degrees.

        Like

  7. The only way to find out what’s in her book is to read it for myself. I think I will be picking up a copy the next time I’m at my local Christian book store, Sam’s Club or Walmart, whichever comes first. Merry Christmas, everyone!

    Like

  8. Hi all,

    Re. citing scripture — the link I had in the post is chock full of Bible verses — https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6877569/Decisions/Decisions.ppt .

    If anyone thinks that Amos 3:7 means that God LITERALLY never does anything without telling his prophets then that is false.

    Deuteronomy and other places note the requirements for prophets. They need to be 100% right 100% of the time. Sarah Young = not a prophet.

    Yes, Jesus could talk to her with special messages that just happen to sound a lot different than the Bible. But the burden of proof is on her. I think it is wise to be skeptical of people making those claims because they are nearly always false. Consider all the “I went to Heaven and came back” books that are full of bad theology. And these people seem to think that they Bible isn’t enough for them.

    As noted in the link, there is no biblical support that personalized messages from God are normative. He could speak to anyone that way but gave no indications that He would do it for everyone.

    Oh, and Jesus told me to tell you all that ;-).

    Like

    1. ematters: Your first mistake is applying Deuteronomy or other parts of the Torah / Law regarding the standard for prophecy or prophets in the NEW TESTAMENT dispensation. Secondly, with the Holy Spirit living IN us and teaching us and giving us revelation (John 14 / 1st Corinthians 2-3), God SHOULD be IN you and speaking TO you, and ALL believers, PERSONALLY. Its called relationship. Like I said, you all are showing not only your lack of understanding of New Testament theology on the issue of spiritual gifts and in particular prophecy, but a lack of understanding of the Holy Spirit and the ministry He has to believers. Not to mention not looking at teachings in the Torah and Nevi’im IN CONTEXT with New Testament teaching. However; if you can show where this woman made a PROPHECY that did not come to pass, I would like to have a link to that, since that is what you are accusing here of.

      Like

      1. Hi Richard,

        First, fyi, eMatters = Neil. Hope you are doing well!

        I’m familiar with the challenges of discerning what in the OT applies to us. But that also applies for those quoting Amos to support their position on prophets, right? And I’ve read the NT a “few” times and know that prophecies need to be tested (their are all sorts of warnings of false teachers). You’ll need to be more specific with 1 Cor 2-3 and John 14. Yes, we have the Holy Spirit as a helper, among other things, but no, there is not a promise for personalized revelation.

        Books like hers are evil. Using your criteria then she could have said almost anything and we’d have to take it at face value. That’s nonsense.

        Did you follow MacArthur’s “Strange Fire” conference or read his book? It addresses a lot of the charismatic nonsense harming the church today. She is a good example of the “sloppy God talk” that undermines the sufficiency of scripture.

        God can speak to people, but when He did it in the Bible it was clear and unmistakable every time. Even the “still, small voice” was an audible voice communicating in complete sentences. Young’s claims would put her words on par with scripture. It is sad that I have to point out what a joke that is.

        One of the worst things about people like Young is that she undermines the true faith of those who think they aren’t really Christians because they don’t get personalized messages like Sarah allegedly does. Another book similar to Young’s (the title escapes me) taught that if you if you do the right things then you get those special messages, too. The author got passages like that of Samuel completely backwards (the text says that he didn’t know the Lord when God first spoke to him, yet her overall theme was the opposite).

        Jesus is calling, all right. Calling people to repent and believe and to trust in his word.

        Like

      2. Neil, how are you bro. Look, I am also critical of false prophecy we find in the charismatic movement. I think that we have to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water, in that we should not put people who are sharing their relationship with Christ and their communication with God regarding their lives in the same box with people like Benny Hinn. There is a big and significant difference.

        Like

    1. Re. the office of prophet — so are you saying Young is a prophet, or not? And are your Corinthians and John 14 passages just supporting their prophetic abilities or those of all believers? I don’t think those passages support the prophetic abilities you describe, but even if they did they don’t appear to describe a particular office.

      Like

      1. I believe that ALL believers have the Holy Spirit and can hear from God directly, specifically when it comes to THEIR OWN LIVES. The spiritual gifting of PROPHECY and the office of PROPHET relate to THIS discussion because of the implication of prophecy in regard to this book and the objections that have been made here due to the author’s “inspiration” and comparisons made to false prophets like Hinn.

        Like

    2. I’ve got better things to do than to listen to a talk which promotes false teaching. Since you’ve not commented about them, and your comments seem to be the same tripe spread by them, I’m assuming you are part of the NAR or IHOP bunch.

      To claim that NT prophecy doesn’t have to have the same standards as OT prophecy is nothing but drivel, which allows anyone to “prophesy” anything. Which is why we have Mike Bickle and his IHOP cult. And of course all those NAR bunch are 100% correct because of all the theology degrees among them.
      (Theology degrees are only good if they agree with your versions, because everyone else is just a “so-called” scholar. I’m sure John MacArthur would be glad to know that.)

      Your prophets are no more real prophets of God that was Joseph Smith – or the current President and Prophet of the LDS. Twist the Scripture to “prove” NT prophets are different and, bingo, anything goes.

      Like

      1. Well if you are to busy to be properly educated on what you are ignorantly speaking of, remain willfully ignorant, pearls before swine and all. Just stop acting like you are educated on the matter, when you clearly are NOT.

        Like

      2. Well if you are to busy to be properly educated on what you are ignorantly speaking of, remain willfully ignorant, pearls before swine and all. Just stop acting like you are educated on the matter, when you clearly are NOT.

        Sorry Mr. bigshot, but I HAVE educated myself on the subject, and have read volumes about it from every side – including the side you are propagating. I really don’t need more.

        Glenn, you cannot determine if Jesus is talking to HER about HER life, stay in your lane and keep your prejudices to yourself…all of them.

        How about keeping YOUR prejudices to YOURSELF! She has published a book with so-called revelations from Jesus. That makes her writings de facto “scripture” for everyone. Even though she claims they are not inspired. What is it that you don’t get about someone claiming revelations from Jesus while at the same time claiming they aren’t inspired?!?!? This is intellectual schizophrenia! You are accepting her self-contradictory terms!!! OH, But we dare not question her revelations or else we are just bigoted and prejudiced.

        So does it really matter where you got your degree from? False teaching comes from all sorts of places!

        You are as bad as Hinn and Crouch, you willfully bask in ignorance and teach others out of that same ignorance.
        So, if I refuse to listen to one more sermon about the same thing I’ve been studying for decades, suddenly I’m ignorant? Oh, I have to listen to YOUR teaching in order to not be ignorant! Why, because YOU have direct revelation from God or something? No, it is YOU who are as bad as Hinn and Crouch when you promote any claim to direct revelations.

        Which makes you a FALSE TEACHER, might want to read up on that in the New Testament while you are warning about false prophets…smh.

        So, I am a “false teacher” because I don’t want to listen to you?!?! Talk about rank arrogance!!!!

        Like

      3. Arrogance is people like you who cannot be educated, willfully ignorant false teachers. You keep talking about things you CLEARLY do not understand and worse yet TEACHING others your misconceptions. You are a false TEACHER, simple as that. It is not that you will not listen to “me” it is that you will not “listen” to sound doctrine on the issue, regardless of WHO it comes from. So like I said, remain a willfully ignorant false teacher, I am sure that you will eventually bump into the TRUTH. I pray you well. Good day.

        Like

      4. Jesus told me to tell everyone to chill a bit 😉 . Just because someone isn’t persuaded by someone else’s reasoning doesn’t mean he is ignorant. If anyone wants to say that Glenn, Richard or I are false teachers, then of course they would have to have a standard. And that same standard would apply to Young, which is the point of this post.

        Like

      5. And BTW, my degrees come from a conservative Baptist Theological seminary, so save your strawman arguments. You are as bad as Hinn and Crouch, you willfully bask in ignorance and teach others out of that same ignorance. Which makes you a FALSE TEACHER, might want to read up on that in the New Testament while you are warning about false prophets…smh.

        Like

      1. From my e-mail of the comment string, I didn’t realize this was not included in the above string, so I’ll repost this comment here:

        Glenn, you cannot determine if Jesus is talking to HER about HER life, stay in your lane and keep your prejudices to yourself…all of them.

        How about keeping YOUR prejudices to YOURSELF! She has published a book with so-called revelations from Jesus. That makes her writings de facto “scripture” for everyone. Even though she claims they are not inspired. What is it that you don’t get about someone claiming revelations from Jesus while at the same time claiming they aren’t inspired?!?!? This is intellectual schizophrenia! You are accepting her self-contradictory terms!!! OH, But we dare not question her revelations or else we are just bigoted and prejudiced.

        Like

  9. It really annoys the crap out of me when people use mental health phrases to try and make a point. ie: “intellectual schizophrenia” Did you really have to go there? If you don’t like the Jesus Calling DEVOTIONAL don’t read it.

    Like

    1. Angela,
      What annoys me is that people even uses the phrase “mental health.” The mind is intangible and cannot be ill or have any health issues. Americans have been brainwash by the secular priests of the psychology religion.

      If you don’t like slaves, don’t have any. If you don’t like abortions, don’t have one. That’s the logic I’m used to hearing from the LEFT.

      Exposing those who make false claims about Jesus has nothing to do with whether or not someone “likes” the book!

      Like

      1. You are wrong about mental illness and the brain. You are also wrong about schizophrenia and your use of the word in your comments to chastise is abhorrent.

        Psychology is not a religion nor is it evil.

        The logic you are used to hearing from the left has nothing to do with me so please do not attempt to project.

        Jesus Calling is a devotional—it has no authority over you.

        Like

      2. Angela,
        No, I am not wrong about “mental illness.” It is a bonafide 100% fact that the MIND cannot be ill. It is intangible – you can’t touch it, you can’t see it, you can’t feel it. It cannot suffer illness. If there is an organic problem with the brain, which affects the thinking processes (such as an injury or genetic defect), then that is treated medically rather than by some “rent a friend” clinical psychologist. Psychology is in direct contradiction and conflict with the Christian faith, and was developed by atheists. Paul Vitz, a professor of Psychology at New York University even has a book titled, “Psychology as Religion: The Cult of Self-Worship.” Clinical psychology, and its bunkmate psychiatry, do more harm than good, as has been reported in many researches.

        The logic I threw back at you was due to your statement that “if you don’t like the Jesus Calling DEVOTIONAL don’t read it.” That is no better a statement that those who say if you don’t like slavery then don’t have slaves. It is an argument without an argument.

        You’re absolutely correct – “Jesus Calling” has no authority over me. However, since the author claims that she gets direct revelation from Jesus with what she writes, then it is de facto Scripture and we would be required to hold in the same level of authority as the BIble.

        And just what is the “fruit” I’m showing, Angela?

        Like

  10. Some quotes from the book that prove the points above. http://mywordlikefire.com/2013/12/13/fake-jesus-flatters-in-jesus-calling/

    “Smith writes, “When looking at these quotes of ‘Jesus’ from Jesus Calling, ask yourself–do these statements sound like things our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ would say?” [1]

    According to the fake “jesus” in the Sarah Young book:

    “When you trustingly whisper My Name, My aching ears are soothed.” [2]

    “When you walk through a day in trusting dependence on Me, My aching heart is soothed.” [3]

    This is creepy. Let’s go on to a couple more quotes from the fake “jesus.”

    “Feel your face tingle as you bask in My Love-Light.” [4]

    “Let My gold-tinged love wash over you and soak into the depths of your being.” [5]

    “Unlike the ‘Jesus’ of Jesus Calling who does so excessively, Jesus Christ never flattered people,” writes Warren B. Smith. [6]

    I am going to review Smith’s full book, but I probably will have short articles along the way. ‘Another Jesus’ Calling is an important book as the popular Jesus Calling seems a product of spirit dictation, like its predecessor of the 1930s, God Calling.

    Endnotes:

    1. Warren B. Smith, ‘Another Jesus’ Calling, pg. 64

    2. Sarah Young, Jesus Calling, pg. 203

    3. Ibid., pg. 182

    4. Ibid., pg. 262

    5. Ibid., pg. 310

    6. Warren B. Smith, ‘Another Jesus’ Calling, pg. 65”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s