Carlton D. Pearson: The Charismatic Bishop of Heresy
Update (07/14/2007): “Carlton Pearson: The closest to God you’ll probably ever get“
On Heresy
What is heresy? The textbook definition is simply:
- An opinion or a doctrine at variance with established religious beliefs … or
- A controversial or unorthodox opinion or doctrine.
And right alongside that definition — at least on this weblog, anyhow — you can find a picture of Bishop Carlton D. Pearson who wants to “rewrite the theology of the charismatic world” by preaching a “Gospel of Inclusion” asserting that Christ’s death conclusively reconciled all mankind to God — whether we realize it or not — and that the only separation between man and God’s grace is subjective, illusionary, and exists only in unenlightened minds (Carlton Pearson, “Jesus Savior of the World/Gospel of Inclusion — Position Paper,” Higher Dimension website, viewed March 5, 2006).
More on that later, but first.…
Heresy at its core is simply a difference of opinion — but a difference that stands against the majority view or the traditional and “orthodox” view of things. Heresy may actually be the correct view. Or, it may be false. Traditionally, the Catholic church reserved the right to label heretics and saints. Thus, Galileo Galilei was a heretic. So was John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, and scores of protesting reformers who dared question the orthodox Catholic view of things. But, of course, the Roman Catholic church doesn’t have a corner on establishing ideology any more, and thus many of our early A/G pioneers were called heretics by the mainline Protestant churches. Now that the A/G is fairly mainstream, we don’t suffer that charge much these days.
But heresy really is more than simply holding an unorthodox view. I mean, after all, who doesn’t hold unorthodox views today? Unorthodox is the new black. We all want to be different — just like all our friends. Get any three people together, and the one dope who disagrees with the other two is the heretic. And his report card probably reads: “Has strong leadership potential.” America was founded on unorthodoxy. It’s in our blood. It’s in our DNA. It’s why Americans love the image of the maverick, the Lone Ranger, the fly-by-the-seat-of-his-pants fighter pilot.
We worship iconoclasm.
Enter Carlton Pearson
So it should come as no surprise that Bishop Carlton Pearson, once cast down, is now on the rise. Once everybody knew Pearson was preaching an “inclusive gospel” (where literally everybody gets a pass into Heaven), he was branded heretic by the World Bishops Council and the Joint College of African-American Pentecostal Bishops. Pearson was denounced by COGIC leader Bishop G.E. Patterson, NAE president Ted Haggard, by Foursquare leader Jack Hayford, and even confronted by the charismatic doctrinal fringe such as his mentor Oral Roberts, John Hagee, Marilyn Hickey and even his protege, T.D. Jakes. Charisma Magazine has maintained a running commentary, as has Christianity Today. But, according to the Dallas Morning News, “Carlton Pearson has still got it.”
Due to Pearson’s theological paradigm shift — popular among the pagan-set — he’s now getting national media attention. Of course. He preaches a toothless gospel: they love him. Apart from the Dallas Morning News coverage, he’s been interviewed by the National Geographic, Dateline NBC, and NPR’s This American Life. His doctrinal dissolution has been exhaustively covered in Christianity Today, Charisma Magazine, and National Catholic Reporter. And Gospel Today has recognized Pearson as one of “America’s 10 Most Influential Black Ministers.” Soon, he’ll be publishing a book titled, God Is not a Christian.
Heresy Redux
Okay … so what? Pearson is merely a little unorthodox, right? Wasn’t his spiritual father, Oral Roberts, unorthodox? Yet nobody branded him a heretic — at least not on this scale. Why is Pearson getting a bad rap?
Because heresy, true heresy, is more than disagreement with orthodoxy. It’s moral quicksand that puts you at odds with no less than the Big Guy Upstairs: God himself.
There are two kinds of heresy: benign heresy and “damnable” heresy. Benign heresies are like benign tumors. You know they exist, they’re a minor irritant, you keep a close eye on them, but these tumors probably won’t kill you as long as they remain benign. Across the church spectrum you’ll find skirmishes over relatively minor doctrinal points with no real eternal consequences. For example: baptism by immersion vs. baptism by sprinkling. If sprinkling was good enough for you, it won’t send you to Hell. Or take communion. Do you take communion with wine, grapefruit juice, or diet soda? Your choice of symbol isn’t fraught with eternal consequences.
Carlton Pearson’s Heresy
But, let’s say you take a cornerstone doctrine of the church — of all Christian churches, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant — crumple it up, and declare that “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,” What do you get? Heresy on the order of a cancerous growth invading your lungs, brain, bones, and limbs (from Carlton Pearson, Jesus: The Savior of the World, cited at Carlton Pearson and Universalism“).
First, Pearson believes in continuing revelation from God. For him, the canon is not closed. Indeed, for Pearson, the Bible is just a collection of books squabbled over by wine-bibbing old men in a stuffy room:
“I won’t get into great detail but I’m just saying, that which we revere as the most sacred lexicon of truth on the planet is not necessarily — and any true scholar will tell you — infallible or inerrant. …” (This American Life, “Heretics, Episode 304” [00:26:35–00:26:51).
So, if the Bible is not really an infallible book on the subject of what God wants us to know about him and his plans for us, then what informs Pearson’s theology?
Voices in his head.
In the Beginning
Pearson explains how he first began to formulate his break from orthodoxy. In 2002, he told Charisma magazine that he “first started thinking about the inclusive doctrine after reading E.W. Kenyon’s writings more than 25 years ago.” Once, something said by a guest on TBN resonated with Pearson, and he began to turn it over in his mind. The quote stuck with him, and it has become the oft-cited line: “The world is already saved, they just don’t know it.”
Still, until the late 1990s Pearson stayed pretty orthodox. Then, when his second child, Majestè Amor, was still an infant in late 1997, Pearson was watching an evening news report about the Hutu-Tutsi conflict in Rwanda. Holding his infant daughter in his lap while watching scenes of extreme malnourishment, he had an epiphany:
I said, “God, I don’t know how you could call yourself a loving, sovereign God and allow these people to suffer this way and just suck them right into Hell” — which was what was my assumption.
And I heard a voice within me say, “Well that’s what you think we’re doing?”
And I remember, I didn’t say yes or no. I said, “That’s what I’ve been taught.”
“We’re sucking them into Hell?”
I said, “Yes.”
“And what would change that?”
“Well, they need to get saved.”
“And how would that happen?”
“Well, somebody needs to preach the gospel to them and get them saved.”
“So, if you think that’s the only way they’re going to get saved is for somebody to preach the gospel to them, and that we’re sucking them into Hell, why don’t you put your little baby down and turn your big screen television off, push your plate away, get on the first plane, and go get them saved?”
Now — and I remember I broke into tears — I was very upset. I remember thinking, “God, don’t put that guilt on me. You know, I’ve given you the best 40 years of my life. Besides, I can’t save the whole world, I’m doing the best I can. I can’t save this whole world.”
And that’s where I remember — and I believe it was God saying: “Precisely. You can’t save this world. That’s what we did. You think we’re sucking them into Hell? Can’t you see they’re already there? That’s Hell. You keep creating and inventing that for yourselves. I’m taking them into my presence.”
And I thought, Well, I’ll be. That’s weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. That’s where the pain comes from. We do that to each other, and we do it to ourselves.
Then I saw emergency rooms. I saw divorce court. I saw jails and prisons. I saw how we create Hell on this planet for each other and I — for the first time in my life — I did not see God as the inventor of Hell. (”Heretics” [20:13-22:03])
Update: For another version of this revelation, see the quote from an interview, posted in my comment, below.
So, there you have it. Born again and called to preach at age 5. Licensed to minister at age 15. Holding week-long revivals and exorcising demons out of his girlfriend at age 16. Ordained into ministry at age 18. Told by God that he would be “a bridge between the nations, denominations, cultures and peoples” at age 21, Founder and CEO of Higher Dimensions Incorporated at age 24, married at age 41, a father of two by age 44.
And a heretic by age 45.
That short slippery slope.…
And now? As the NPR interviewer said, “All of his detractors — who predicted that once you stopped believing in Hell and sin, you start down a long, slippery slope to decadent universalism — were wrong: it’s a lot faster than they could have imagined” (”Heretics” [48:13-48:51]) Now, Muslims, homosexuals, and Buddhists attend Pearson’s church. And when Pearson compares the orthodox view of God to Hussein, bin Laden, and Hitler — now God comes out looking like a monster:
“The way the God of the Bible — particularly the Old Testament — is presented, he’s — he’s — he’s a monster. The God that we’ve been preaching is a monster. He’s worse than Saddam. He’s worse than Osama bin Laden, he’s worse than Hitler — the way we’ve presented him — because Hitler just burned six million Jews. You know, but God’s going to burn at least six billion people … and burn them forever. Here’s this customized torture chamber called Hell where he’s going to torment … torture … not for a few minutes, or a few days, or a few hours, a few weeks — forever.” (”Heretics” [23:18-22:53])
GaySidious
Not that I’m complaining about Muslims, homosexuals, or Buddhists attending an Evangelical church, I applaud that, and wish we would see more of it — if only to encourage open dialog and exploration rather than outright distrust and animosity. But Carlton’s agenda now is driven by his aberrant theology, and it’s insidious. It’s not that he’s deviously helping, say, the homosexual, repent of his sins in order to get right with God. No, that’s not necessary any longer. What Carlton wants to see is homosexual leaders infiltrating Evangelical churches in order to corrupt them:
“Pearson said he hoped gay leaders would ‘build silent bridges’ by joining the staff of ‘heterosexual churches’ and gradually convincing them to accept the gay lifestyle” (J. Lee Grady, “Heretics Among Us,” Charisma, April 2004).
Loving heretics don’t kill souls, heresy does
And Pearson’s gospel is not just de-clawed and de-fanged without a real Hell, it’s not just quietly respectful and tolerant of the Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist visitor just down the pew, it’s unintentionally malicious because it offers a poisonous lie rather than life-giving truth. It comforts the unbeliever in his unbelief, providing exactly no compelling reason to consider the claims of Christ. As Pearson relates, regarding a Hindu friend who underwrites Pearson’s radio ministry:
“My Hindu friend wasn’t sure he wanted to become a Christian because he and his family had been Hindu for generations and he didn’t want to believe that his father — a good, devout Hindu — was in hell,” Pearson said. “I said: ‘I think your father is in heaven; don’t you think so? Your dad is as reconciled to God as I am, according to the Scriptures’” (Natalie Nichols, “Controversy Clouds Pearson’s Ministry,” Charisma, October 2002).
Heretics don’t destroy towers, Evangelical theology does
And Pearson seems to empathize with the terrorists. According to Pearson, God says we Evangelicals and our hellish version of God are to blame for 9/11:
“God said, ‘In order to get attention you might have to create some tension, because I want you to re-present me to the world.’ He said, ‘You all have not done it accurately. You have not done me justice. People don’t like me because of the way you represent me.’ And he said, ‘You’re not preaching me like I am, and that’s why trade towers will continue to fall and religious wars will fight’” (”Heretics” [36:58–37:21]).
The paradox
But Pearson’s theology is not without is paradoxical wrinkles and contradictions. In a letter to Charisma magazine in response to continued attacks and reports of heresy, Pearson wrote about a real Hell for those few who will not be saved:
“For the record: I do believe that all will be saved with the exception of those who, in their heart, intentionally and consciously reject the grace of God, which brings salvation and has appeared to all men (see Titus 2:11). I believe in heaven and hell, though I am persuaded that hell is much worse and heaven is much greater than I can imagine” (Carlton Pearson, “Carlton Pearson Responds to Criticism,” Charisma, August 2002).
So, let me get this straight. Pearson’s “Gospel of Inclusion” holds that Christ’s death reconciled all mankind to God, made it possible for God to accept all mankind as totally clean, and proved God’s unconditional love for all his creatures. That the only separation between man and God’s grace is subjective, illusionary, and exists only in unenlightened minds (Carlton Pearson, “Jesus Savior of the World/Gospel of Inclusion — Position Paper,” Higher Dimension website, viewed March 5, 2006). And, further, that “it is reasonable” that Satan himself will go to heaven — if he says “I’m sorry” (Selwyn Crawford, “Devil may go to heaven, says beleaguered bishop,” Dallas Morning News, May 10, 2003. Cited on ReligionNews.com, viewed March 05, 2006). …
But, if you reject God’s grace you’ll go to Hell?
If this is the mumbo-jumbo that passes for theology in Pearson’s church, then he should consider well the implications here: if everybody already has a free pass to Heaven risked only by rejecting God’s grace — then for the love of God stop preaching! By persisting in his bishopric, by maintaining his radio program, by staying on the missions-sending boards of a handful of churches, by promoting his Azusa conferences, by continually preaching his new gospel day-in and day-out, by accepting national-level interview opportunities, Pearson is actively and energetically sending people to a Hell he doesn’t believe in!
On that, perhaps, Carlton Pearson and I could agree.
Stop. Preaching. Please.
The roots of heresy
NOTE (08/06/2007):I have been challenged in private email regarding my claim that Pearson was mentored by illiterate preachers. I can no longer find my notes which led to me make that claim and I hereby respectfully and apologetically retract that statement. I did not mean to disparage
Pearson’s mentors within the COGIC movement.
Carlton Pearson is an amazing leader. I cannot imagine the drive and energy it took for a young black man starting out as a minister in the 70’s, discipled by illiterate preachers, to rise to the very pinnacle of the Pentecostal/Charismatic fame. Pearson has been invited to the White House under both Bush administrations and the Clinton administration. He was tapped by Bush to sit on his Faith-Based Initiatives advisory panel. He had friends around the world who were the elite of the Evangelical ministry world — and they were inviting him to be their guest preacher. He sat on the ORU Board of Regents for 15 years, and pastored a 5,000 member church that covered 30–acres. He was on TBN and SkyAngel, radio, in print. He won two Stellar awards, and was nominated for a Dove award. He founded a major annual conference that easily drew 50,000 attendees, including the most sought-after preachers in the Pentecostal/charismatic world. He founded the Beacon College and Graduate School, created the Azusa Federal Credit Union, and ran in the Tulsa Republican Primary for mayor.
Pearson’s resume is not a typical preacher’s bulleted list of accomplishments.
And the personal cost of Pearson’s paradigm shift has been great. You can hear it in his voice when he describes the relationships lost, the bridges burned, and the successes forgotten. But buried within his recitation of woe, you can also hear the seeds of his misfortune: egotism:
“I miss ORU. I miss the Board. I miss being Bishop Pearson, the celebrated preacher. I miss my people that packed this place out and came by the thousands, and I baptized them, and dedicated their babies, and saw them play together, and ran into them at theaters, and saw them in the mall — and they’d hug my neck and their babies would kiss me and I would hold their little babies and preach to them on Sundays and pray with them on Saturday nights.
“I would’ve been studying right now and getting ready for them in the morning … I built this whole place for them.
“I miss being able to pick up the phone and call my friends all over the country and say ‘I’m going to be in your city in a couple of weeks, let’s get together.’ ‘Oh would you come and speak for us?’
“And, you know, that whole world — that’s all gone. At least, it appears like it is, for me. I’m not celebrated among those people. They don’t think about me any more.
“It’s like I died. And they mourned my death. And they’re pretty much over it” (”Heretics,” [38:28-39:35]).
Grady’s five trends
Charisma editor, J. Lee Grady, wrote a brief, insightful editorial warning of the “potential for more Carlton Pearson scenarios.” He identifies “five unhealthy trends in our churches that are sure breeding grounds for heresy:”
» Egotism
» Authoritarianism
» Elitism
» Legalism
» Mysticism
(J. Lee Grady, “Learn to Discern,” Charisma, February, 2003)
The bullet points may be self-evident, but the article is still worth the read and should, perhaps, be required discussion material for all ministerial candidates. Throughout my research for this post I found evidence for all five trends in Carlton Pearson’s history (with the possible exception of “authoritarianism,” but only the members of his church would be able to testify to that). If Grady’s right, it would only take one of these boat-anchors to sink a solid, respected, preacher like Pearson.
Conclusion
If there’s anything I walk away from this research with, it’s the knowledge that I, too, could fall prey to heresy if my world revolves around me, my needs, my plans, my emotions, and my desires. I, too, could fall prey to heresy if I become the sole authority in my life, accountable to no one but lording it over others. I, too, could fall prey to heresy if I view myself as one of the rarefied few, one of the cognoscenti, the inner-crowd with a special all-access pass that insulates me from the real concerns of the hoi polloi. I, too, could fall prey to heresy if I elevate obedience out of balance to grace, if I serve the letter of the law, rather than the spirit of the law, and the law-giver himself. I, too, could fall prey to heresy if I fail to properly discern my impulses, fail to “test the spirits” and measure all my intuitions against the Word of God, and assume I have an inside track to God’s mind and plans that no one else has access to.
I pray God helps me stay on guard. I also pray God brings Carlton Pearson back to the fold.
The Church needs him, I miss him, and I’m certain God does, too.
Web Links
- Heretics, Episode 304 (12/16/2005) — National Public Radio: This American Life
- The fall and rise of Carlton Pearson – The Dallas Morning News. Also here.
- Devil may go to heaven, says beleaguered bishop – The Dallas Morning News
- America’s Christian Star Power – Treasure In Clay Jars
- Pearson’s “Gospel of Inclusion” Stirs Controversy — Charisma Magazine Online
- Carlton Pearson Responds to Criticism — Charisma Magazine Online
- Controversy Clouds Pearson’s Ministry — Charisma Magazine Online
- Bishops Say Carlton Pearson ‘Heretical’ — Charisma Magazine Online
- Group Says Pentecostal Bishop Pearson a ‘Heretic’ for ‘Inclusionism’ Views — Beliefnet.com
- ‘Inclusionism’ deemed heresy — The Washington Times — April 21, 2004
- Bishops Endorse Carlton Pearson — Charisma Magazine Online
- Heretics Among Us, By J. Lee Grady — Charisma Magazine Online
- Black Pentecostal Group Denounces Carlton Pearson as a Heretic — Charisma Magazine Online
- Called to Account — Christianity Today Magazine
- Too Inclusive — Christianity Today Magazine
- Heresy Charge Torpedoes Pastor’s Political Debut — Christianity Today magazine
- Pearson faces theological controversy – ReligionNewsBlog
- Carlton Pearson and Universalism – LetUsReason.org
- Definite Redemption, Jesus Christ Died for God’s Elect. by J. I. Packer (Monergism.com)
- Carlton Pearson, “The Gospel of Inclusion” – OnDoctrine.com
- Honoring many paths – ReligionNewsBlog
- Higher Dimensions official website (Note: as of 07/14/2007, site points to a porn address. Try the Internet Archive
- Jesus Savior of the World/Gospel of Inclusion (Position Paper) by Bishop Carlton D. Pearson (Note as of 07/14/2007, site points to porn. Try the Internet Archive instead.)
- International Communion of Charismatic Churches (ICCC)
- Inclusion2005 – formerly Azusa.org. Official website of Azusa conferences.
- Learn to Discern – Charisma Magazine Online
- For Whom Did Christ Die? & What Did Christ Actually Achieve on the Cross for Those for Whom He Died? by John Piper (Monergism.com)
- Four Kinds of Universalism – Banner of Truth Trust
- Universalism Briefly Examined, Matt Perman (Director, Internet & Radio, Desiring God Ministries)
- Universalism – The Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
- A Summary Critique: Universalism Isn’t for Everyone – Christian Research Institute
- Confessions of a Universalist — Charisma Magazine Online
- Americans Describe Their Views About Life After Death – Barna.org Research Report
From the Blogiverse
- HERESY: The Paulks Meet Carlton Pearson’s Inclusive Gospel! (The Sheep’s Crib)
Pearson has announced that his next major theological summit — called Inclusion 2006 — will be held in October at Cathedral of the Holy Spirit [aka Cathedral at Chapel Hill], a charismatic church founded by Bishop Earl Paulk in the Atlanta suburb of Decatur.
- Will Carlton Pearson ‘Win’? (Strang Communications: The Ministry Report)
These “common-sense” objections to the traditional view of hell may resonate with the secular skeptic, but Pearson’s noticeable avoidance of a coherent biblical argument should strike any thoughtful Christian as bizarre. If you intend to dismantle a cardinal doctrine built on two millennia of church history and Scriptural interpretation, you need more than a handful of witty one-liners. It’s like trying to take down the Brooklyn Bridge with a butter knife.
- Apostate ‘Gospel of Inclusion’ (ENewsBlog)
One of Pearson’s supporters, in showing his support for inclusionism, writes on Pearson’s Web site: “Any God who would cast away the majority of mankind, as your critics insist, is not deserving of anyone’s worship or praise.”<br /><br />In other words: We don’t like the God of the Bible. We want to fashion a new god in our own image.
Update (07/14/2007): Pearson’s once-official higherd.org website has been taken over by porn.
View and browse tags for this post…
Suspiciously Similar Posts
The machine does this. Your mileage may vary
- Carlton Pearson: The closest to God you’ll probably ever get (11 comments)
- Del.icio.us links for August 26, 2006 (0 comments)
- Cheap Grace: Pimp my gospel! (10 comments)
- Fatal Sincerity: Our complicit silence when heresy speaks (23 comments)
- Apostasy: Rejecting Ideas (5 comments)
- BlogRodent turns one: top 10 posts, plus top ten lessons. (8 comments)
- Do Heaven and Hell exist? (1 comments)
Posted: Monday, March 6, 2006 @ 7:48 pm
This is really, really sad. But I have seen, up close in fact, this kind of thing happen before: a very gifted young minister starts out okay, but a short distance down the track he goes entirely off the rails, with terrible and tragic consequences, not only for himself but for many others.
Posted: Monday, March 6, 2006 @ 8:01 pm
Thanks Oengus, for the comment. What do you think are some of the causes of such a slide into heresy or apostasy? Or, if that’s too big a task, what do you think are some indicators for the risk of such a slide?
I like Grady’s trends as indicators, but I’m wondering if there are other precursors we should watch for in our own lives. Certainly, a lack of accountability would be one, and a lack of truly intimate friendships would be another.
I’ve long held that there is much preventative medicine in Paul’s injunction to “lay hands on no man suddenly.” We are too quick to thrust people into ministry before they are mature enough to cope with the dangers and stresses. Holding revival meetings at age 15 is really far too early for a young man to be in ministry. And Carlton’s testimony that he cast a demon out of his girlfriend at age 15/16 only puts the icing on it. If he had been more mature he would either have discerned that there was something not right with this girl before dating her or he would have discerned that this wasn’t a true case of demon possession.
But any age can be too young. I suspect there are different factors of maturity in play in Paul’s proscription… are we talking about “suddenly” in terms of chronological age, amount of time spent in the faith, amount of wisdom one has gained, emotional maturity, social maturity, etc., etc., I suspect, to some degree, “All of the above.”
The seeds of Pearson’s failures were planted long before he graduated High School, I’m sure.
Regards,
Rich
BlogRodent
Posted: Tuesday, March 7, 2006 @ 12:23 pm
[Just to let you know, your site takes 3-4x longer to load than most any other blog I visit. Painfully slow.]
Reading through your post reminded me of the movie “Defending Your Life” with Albert Brooks and Meryl Streep. When he asked about hell, his advisor (Rip Torn) told him that it was just made up to scare folks. The point of the movie was reaching heaven could be done by overcoming fear, something you did on your own. If you could not do it in one life, then you were sent back down to Earth to try again.
By changing the requirements for entrance to heaven, Pearson changes faith from God-centered to self-centered. Instead of serving the Lord, we are supposed to be worried about how we can make life on Earth less “hellish”. By not humbling ourselves at the foot of the cross to Jesus, we don’t have to humble ourselves to anyone.
I would question mysticism as the fifth “heresy trend”. Here’s what Grady said:
“We charismatics are challenging the church at large to embrace the supernatural gifts of the Spirit, and that’s a good thing. But let’s not forget that the gift of discernment is just as necessary as visions and miracles.”
Discernment and mysticism/mystery are not mutually exclusive. We cannot hope to comprehend the mind of God. It is that element of mystery that can help us to dig through the Word further, and hopefully accepting what cannot be explained yet is part of God’s will. If anything, Pearson does away with mystery and has discerned everything by simplifying the way to heaven with his inane explanations.
[PS The link for the Grady article is missing the id # = 7100.]
[PPS For those who need a Pearson antidote, I just finished reading Jonathon Edward’s sermon “Sinners In the Hands of an Angry God”. Now that’s some hellfire and brimstone for ya!]
Posted: Tuesday, March 7, 2006 @ 9:41 pm
Greetings, Rich.
I’ll try to respond briefly.
Paul’s injunction “lay hands on no man suddenly”, in my mind, is absolutely paramount. In the case I know about, the minister was a young man, in his twenties, but he was thrust much too soon into the a very public and quite spectacular ministry. His gifting was in the area of praying for the sick. But having a spectacular ministry that draws much attention and acclaim also can be used by the Enemy as a temptation to pride. I truely believe that a young minister must keep in mind that he absolutely must have the continual council and advice of elders in the faith; and he must be prepared to swallow his pride and listen.
Moreover, isolation especially is a very grave sign, in my opinion. Once the minister isolates himself, especially from more elderly, well-seasoned, and mature believers, and then surrounds himself with a coterie of hand-picked yes-men, especially if they are also young like himself, then he is in a very perilous condition.
Another bad sign is an over concern for material wealth and appearances. Another bad sign is suspectibility to sexual immorality. Pride coupled with all these other things is a recipe for disaster.
There’s much more I can say on this subject, but trying to write a lengthy discourse in a comment box is not practical. But the above are some major points.
As a side note, I also agree with Marc V above. “Mysticism” per se is not necessarily an litmus test for sliding into heresy. I say this because I have personally studied some of the great mystics within the context of mainstream church history. Most of them (e.g., St. Teresa of Avila, or St Francis of Assisi) are really very feet-on-the-ground sort of people, who maintained themselves within the mainstream of historic, orthodox Xtian confession. In fact, they really didn’t think of themselves as special in anyway, and never applied the label “mystic” to themselves. They were simply people who were completely and totally obsessed with loving and following XP. Furthermore, they exhibited those qualities of complete humility that runs completely opposite to the pride that accompanies egregious heresies.
Posted: Wednesday, March 8, 2006 @ 6:51 am
Rick, I’m wondering: While I’m well aware of those Biblical verses such as “no other name whereby men might be saved”, do you know of any that put it out there in black and white where “Jesus=heaven; no Jesus=no heaven”. I’ve pondered this question over and over for a long time and, rather than “heresy”, find it all comes down to one’s definition of “saved” and, boy, don’t we get into a long difference of opinion on that one. This Oral Robert’s prodigy doesn’t sound like anyone I’d follow down the road; but, then, I’ve always tried to follow the Voice Christ brought unto me. Most certainly, that’s through the Word and hindered by my side of the partnership, making it a sort of drunken man’s stumble down the strait path. It’s kept my feet, though, out of doctrinal cement, and my soul hungry to know the heart tug on the other end of the rope anchored in Him………….
Posted: Friday, March 10, 2006 @ 4:50 pm
To All-
I have enjoyed the comments posted and the write-up on Pearson. My heart goes to him and after listening to his NPR interview I can hear a man in pain. Although, it was by his own doing, I have to say it seems (from the outside) his friends have not done a great job of assisting him. The church turned their back on this guy which lead him to go further down this road.
If you grow up in all black pentecostal church like I did (COGIC) you understand how important Pearson is too many. He crossed many gaps and built many brigdes. He legitmized in my eyesight the passion and love for God many pentecostals had while still adding the flair we were pursecuted for! I used to be ashamed to tell people I want to a church were people danced and spoke in tongues. I imagined all my friends would get the “Blues Brothers” church image and laugh.
It is very painful and sad however you all are right. This was E.A.E.L.M at its best. Although, it seems that people have taken great joy in this including the “Christian” magazines, who should have called for prayer and fasting for this man, his family and members of his church. Oral Roberts and others in that group have left the man to seek others for support and love.
Pearson is a great man and even though he has been persecuted for his teachings (unlike many “Christians”) he sees this a test and trial. And as twisted as it may sound, I doubt many pastors would for sake all for any stance.
Please pray for our brother that the Lord my remove the mud from his eyes.
Posted: Saturday, March 11, 2006 @ 8:16 pm
For more on how Carlton Pearson thinks see this two-part interview by Heber Brown with Pearson on the phone. Brown seems quite sympathetic to Pearson’s message, but he does have some questions that gets Pearson to reveal a lot.
There’s a lot that’s interesting here, and Pearson unveils a lot of his core theology. It’s worth listening to.
One of the interesting things is a different version of Pearson’s paradigm-shifting “revelation” and the voices in his head:
[Part 1: 05:00-07:56]
Posted: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 @ 3:31 pm
That last interview is interesting.
I agree that God would not send His children to hell. I also believe that if you have not been born of the Spirit, you are not a child of God.
Posted: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 @ 9:12 pm
I was at Higher Dimensions. I want to answer the authoritarian issue. He was quite one. Way too many times he would explode when things were not exactly right. I was there for quite a long time, almost 12 years. I quit attending in 1996 right when he started saying on occasion “everybody’s saved they just don’t know it”. He had quit preaching out of the Bible long before then. Lots of messages came from magazine articles with no Biblical reference included. I’m still in shock about what has happened. The main problem was his ego. It appears when he was traveling he showed another side to them but when he came back home it was a different story. I was there when they had 5000 in attendance. This was before they built an extension to the sanctuary and the Destiny Center. They had 3 Sunday morning services, 1 Sunday evening service, one mid-week service and Saturday night prayer. While I was attending Saturday night prayer he was rarely if ever there. Maybe that changed after people started leaving. They have foreclosed on the property about a year ago. It is so sad to see a ministry go down all because he has decided to leave the basis teachings of the Bible, that is, we must confess our sins to the Lord to receive forgiveness. He also decided to lie on those that tried to counsel him by saying that no one came to him privately before going public when many did. For him to go against Oral Roberts who was like a father to him when I was a student at ORU made me conclude that Carlton Pearson has truly lost his mind.
Posted: Thursday, March 23, 2006 @ 1:35 am
Thanks for the update pgcfriend, I appreciate it. I felt strongly that egotism played a central role in Pearson’s confusion. The NPR interview positively glows with a rainbow of egotism hidden ‘neath a pale veneer of humility. “I built this church for them.” “They left me.” “It’s like I died and they buried me.” “They’ve forgotten me.” Etc.
I couldn’t speak to the authoritarianism issue because I’d never sat in his church, but I was sure that if evidence for it existed, we’d eventually hear from former congregants. Thanks for speaking out.
I am reminded of when Jimmy Swaggart initially fell from grace when his sexual sins were revealed. His personal assessment after the fact was right on: He had isolated himself from peers, from his fellow ministers, from his congregation, from anyone in authority over him, and even from his wife. A close friend of mine who now teaches at the A/G’s Evangel University once taught at ORU as well, and he sat on stage with Swaggart at his church. He told me that he and other leaders attempted to counsel Swaggart, but it was clear that there was no penetrating the ivory tower that Swaggart had built around himself.
In the end the most important isolation occurred in Swaggart’s life, and that was his devotional life. The Louisiana district official at the time, after investigating the matter and interviewing Swaggart extensively, came away concluding that Swaggart’s devotional life had completely dried up, and with it, so did his accountability to others. Those two factors, devotion and accountability, destroyed his defenses.
I don’t know about Pearson’s devotional intimacy or his spiritual disciplines, but it sure sounds like accountability was lacking. And that, in my opinion, is a significant symptom of egotism.
Thanks again for the contribution.
Regards,
Rich
BlogRodent
Posted: Thursday, March 23, 2006 @ 8:33 am
Rich,
Great observation. A warning to us all.
Posted: Saturday, March 25, 2006 @ 11:40 pm
To All Carlton Bashers and to Brother Carlton:
I’ve known Carlton Pearson since I was 10 years old. I considered him one of the greatest spiritual influences in my life. His humility at that time and his love for Jesus was like no other. I can remember asking him to meet with me one day when he was speaking at a retreat. I had bought him a ring (a $5.00-turn your finger green ring) He came and sat with me as I filled out the card, he had no fronts, no pride, just a Jesus-like character, that’s all that was in his heart. That evening in the meeting he wore the ring, he also made a point to turn it on his finger and give me a wink so I would see he was wearing it. To a 10 year old, that means, that my gift was worthy. Why is that so important? Because not many preachers who are well known, would take the time to sit with a ten year old, much less wear a $5.00 ring for the evening service. But Jesus would’ve surely, however. I asked him to be my pen pal and he agreed. He wrote me faithfully, letters of encouragement, inspiration and Godly guidance. He wrote me until I stopped writing him…when I became too prideful as a teenager and I thought that was silly, so I stopped writing. How many big preachers do you know who would take the time to hand write a little kid?
After moving from Tulsa I heard him speak a few more times at various places across the country. I haven’t seen him in about 10 years, I am 35 now I am a lawyer, married with two kids. When I heard about Carlton’s new, temporary beliefs I was deeply moved, saddened and crushed. Carlton was such a spiritual father in my entire family. He was the instrument who was used by God when my sister was miraculously healed of anorexia nervosa and a life-long knee injury that prevented her from running or jumping. My sister is healed today and God used Carlton to be the vehicle through which he brought about that healing. He prayed over her one night-following God’s direction, told her to jump off the stage and run… and she did, and she still does. Needless to say, my family and I have great respect and affection for Carlton Pearson as a Holy man of God. Despite what he may think now, his life before, his teachings his core roots, inspired so many and spread so deeply, that he will truly never be able to comprehend. As a 35 year old woman I can still hear his teachings resonating in my head at different times when I am teaching my children.
So what do I say now to him?? I will pray… and pray… and pray. At the close of his letters he wrote to me as a youth, he would always write, “I am praying for you”. Carlton,- Now, as an adult, I am praying for you. I will pray for him and stand on this scripture: Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it” Many who know Carlton know that he was trained up right by God-fearing parents, therefore, we can stand on that scripture.
It is true that the average christian acts so contrary to what Christ was all about that you can scarcely identify with what people do under the name of “Christianity”. IT is also true that society as a whole is so wrapped up in the love of money that the churches seem unable to be free from allowing it to become the focus and emphasis of many. Surely a doctrine which includes all — will become the “wave of the future,” it is entirely secular, entirely approving of everything. That’s attractive to the world. Carlton, you taught me that in your teachings. You taught us that the world loves money, that the world loves sin, that when you sin once, it is uncomfortable, then you sin again and it becomes easy, then you sin again and it becomes a habit. So many things you taught, sound wisdom. You also taught clearly from the Bible, Christ’s love for all mankind, his love for the homosexual, for the murderer, for the adulterer, for the one who tells the “white lie”. The way you taught about Jesus’ love was awesome, because you lived it. So with the wisdom I have gained, and all of the education and life experience I have received, I ask you, if this inclusion doctrine is true, why live right? I am going to heaven no matter what? I could, do anything? Cheat on my husband, Cheat on my taxes, Cheat in my Court proceedings, lie, steal, hate, and kill, have any kind of immorality in my life…and completely disregard Jesus? -yes I can and still go to heaven? I remember you saying, if Christianity is not true why live right? We could have much more “fun” right? But what kind of fun? and is it real? NO. It is not.
I thank God that you were a part of my life growing up, a great spiritual influence on my entire family, and dear to my heart you will always be. I thank God for all of the wonderful teachings you taught straight from the Bible, that produced in us a strong and God-Loving family, I thank God for his keeping power and his mercy and love. Jesus please reach out to him and bring him back. I love you Brother Carlton and I am praying for you. Thank you for praying for me all those years and Thank you for your service to the Lord.
-Judy
Posted: Monday, March 27, 2006 @ 2:44 am
Judy,
Thank you for your heart-felt and compassionate post. I hope you do not think I posted this simply for the sake of bashing a man who is a hero to many. As you do, I also pray that Pearson comes back to the Church. As I wrote in my post: “I pray God helps me stay on guard. I also pray God brings Carlton Pearson back to the fold. The Church needs him, I miss him, and I’m certain God does, too.”
Your concerns about Pearson’s theology are the same concerns I have. I hope, as you are convinced, that Pearson’s theological position is temporary, but it seems to have been fomenting in his life for some time, and he does seem fully committed to his course now. And for that I grieve, because the few times I have heard Carlton Pearson preach I thought he was a phenomenal teacher. He was, in those days, a credit to the Church.
I cannot dismiss, though, the interviews I heard him give, and the reports from those who also sat under him. If any of us are to avoid the journey Pearson is on, it will serve us well to understand what led him to this change–paradigm shifts like this aren’t whims coming “out of the blue.” A foundation must be laid beforehand to make it possible. And after hearing these interviews, and after seeing the outworking of his new theology (including encouraging gays to infiltrate straight churches), I remain convinced that egotism and pride are at the root.
That doesn’t mean that Pearson isn’t a compassionate and caring man. And it doesn’t mean he didn’t have a deep impact as a man of God and a fine preacher. But the problem of pride is something that all preachers must beware. And, indeed, it is something for the rest of us, too.
None of us should ever think ourselves outside the destructive reach of the temptation and sin of pride and egotism. And none of us should ever underestimate the power of seemingly “little” sins to ultimately derail one’s life.
Thanks, again, for the excellent contribution to the dialog. I appreciate it, and your prayers for Pearson are well needed.
Regards,
Rich
BlogRodent
Posted: Monday, March 27, 2006 @ 7:03 pm
Thank you Rich,
Posted: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 @ 7:21 am
Just one more comment… to Carlton on the quote above, reprinted here:
We think of you Carlton. Now actually more than ever. But no one is “worshipping” you anymore, as so many do, now everyone is smacked back into realtity–we are all human even you.
Like Jesus leaves the whole flock to get the one lost sheep, those who love you dearly will think of you now more than ever, pray and believe, and we do believe.
Rich,
Excellent writing style, I am new to the blog world, I would love to do an article on Carltons’ old teachings, post it and have others add to it, all the prophesies he gave about, Christ’s love for the homosexuality, promiscuity, the unsaved, etc. It is so sad, it is such a hairline fracture, but as he always said, “If you let the devil get a toe in your door he will jam his whole way in.”
Ok one last question that troubles me… who is Carlton referring to when he says “we” as God talikng? Is he denying the Trinity? as in his quotes where God told him “we don’t etc. etc.”
God Bless!
Posted: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 @ 9:00 am
Has there ever been a national call for prayer or fasting for Pearson? I did not read the magazines articles however did any of them call for prayer for the man?
Posted: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 @ 2:31 pm
Thank you, Judy, for the compliment, I appreciate it.
As to Carlton saying “We” when voicing the words of God, I am not overly troubled by it. It’s unorthodox because our English Bibles don’t typically have God speaking in a first-person plural manner–but interestingly, the Hebrew does. All the way back in Genesis, in the creation account, you’ll find this:
The “us” referred to here in Genesis 1:26 comes from the Hebrew “Elohim.” This term is a sort of royal “we” that Kings and tribal leaders employed. Many OT translators feel that the plural “Elohim” is the first justification for the doctrine of the Trinity–but I’m not sure. I just know that in the Near East of old, royalty spoke of themselves in the first-person plural.
Certainly God, as a triune being and the Most High, has grounds to refer to himself in the first person plural more than anyone else here on Earth.
So, while it’s not common, I’m not troubled by Carlton putting “we” into God’s mouth. What’s far more troubling, of course, is the doctrinal content.
Keith,
In most of the articles I read, there were only one or two that called for prayer. But, then, I wouldn’t expect them to. Most so-called “news” magazines attempt to report the facts and maybe provide commentary, but usually don’t call others to action. Even when Christian news magazines were reporting on the Hurricane Katrina disaster, I don’t recall most calling for prayer. This is one of those things that perhaps shouldn’t go without saying, but usually does.
If you know how to pray, you already know when it’s appropriate to pray.
And, really, it’s possible we shouldn’t be praying for Carlton. I wonder… See John:
I leave it to you to apply this passage to Carlton Pearson’s situation.
As for me, I’m still praying for him.
Regards,
Rich.
BlogRodent
Posted: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 @ 3:19 pm
Interesting. Thank you Rich — that makes sense and i remember actually learning that as well, but I had forgottten.
Keith, that is an awesome idea, a day of fasting.
Posted: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 @ 2:04 am
Urban Tulsa has produced a brilliant article with great questions from Jarrod Gollihare to the Bishop Pearson. There are some great quotes here, including a version of Pearson’s revelation that combines the two versions I’ve unearthed here. There’s too much to quote, really, but it’s an article well-worth the read if you’re interested.
Rich
BlogRodent
Posted: Thursday, April 6, 2006 @ 1:07 pm
Evangelical Christianity
Or
How to Earn Brownie Points by Pissing on Carlton Pearson
Christians have a long history of screwing things up in the name of God. That’s why the church’s treatment of Carlton Pearson doesn’t surprise me.
Before I proceed to bash the Evangelical Church, let me make one important point: The Church and Christ are not one and the same. Christ loves unconditionally. Christ forgives, restores, and accepts. Jesus is God’s love personified. He transcends time, space, color, gender, and creed. Christ doesn’t hurt; Christ heals.
The Evangelical Church, however, is an embarrassment. I used to call myself a Christian, but once I saw how the Christian megastars (and you know who you are) basically pissed all over Carlton Pearson, I don’t call myself “Christian” anymore. I would rather chew glass than be associated with this self-righteous, judgmental, mean-spirited group of people.
The fact is, Evangelical Christians aren’t that much different from others who insist they’ve cornered the market on truth. What do Evangelicals have in common with the KKK and Al Qaeda? They all say the same thing: “Believe what we believe, or else!!” What’s more, they’re on a mission from God. And they all point to their respective holy books to prove it.
Carlton Pearson offended the Evangelical Establishment because he dared to think for himself. And why is this so offensive to the church? It’s simple. For centuries, the Church has manipulated masses of ignorant people. In fact, Evangelical Christianity depends on people who can’t think for themselves, who insist on being told what to do, how to feel, and who to judge. And because there’s no danger of these people actually going to a library, all the church leaders have to do to prove their twisted points is say, “Look, see, it’s right here in the Bible!”
And so ignorance breeds ignorance. Evangelicals rehearse the same sermons and scriptures, year in and year out. They don’t know squat about the Bible’s origin or history, yet they take Bible verses out of context, memorize them, and like human BB guns at the ready, they turn off their brains and spit out their verses like magic bullets meant to silence any dissenting opinion. And then they go back and learn more verses, refilling their guns again and again. Who they murder in the process really doesn’t matter. After all, what’s love got to do with it?
Yes, Christians have been screwing things up in the name of God for centuries. If you’d like a laundry list of Christian sins that stink to High Heaven, then grab an encyclopedia. Start with the Christian Crusades of the 11th century and work your way right on up to slavery in America and then follow that with the most recent bombing of an abortion clinic or hate crime against a gay person. All in the name of God.
Evangelicals are scared to death of new ideas. Of course, if your entire reading experience consists of the Bible, different translations of the Bible, and books based on the Bible, then I suppose that ideas from outside of the Bible can frighten the bejeezus out of you. If God were as paranoid of ideas as Evangelicals are, then our skulls would be hollow. He would have created us without brains. But why give us brains and then punish us for thinking? (It’s like punishing a penis for having a hard-on.)
And that’s where the Christian megastars come in. Evangelicals don’t necessarily want to think, but they DO want to be entertained. Don’t ask Evangelicals hard questions, like why there were no Bibles before 300AD, or why the book of Revelations doesn’t appear in the earliest edition of the Bible, or what Jesus meant when He referred to His “other sheep.” Don’t ask Evangelicals where hell comes from, or about the real reason Christmas is celebrated on December 25th. Don’t ask Evangelicals to ponder any of that. But do give them a good show!!
And so the Evangelical world has its own roster of megastars, preachers and singers (I mean, “worshippers,” right?) who have all of the usual show-biz trappings. Their “A” list of speakers command huge honorariums and manipulate big crowds by promising prosperity, setting fashion trends, and marketing their respective product lines. Like thousands of others, I saw the “A” list year after year at Azusa, and I, too, once enjoyed my own share of pseudo-spiritual orgasms. But while these “A-listers” continue to sell their CDs, hold their conferences, and appear on everything from commercials to cooking shows, they piss on Carlton Pearson, the one largely responsible for exposing them to their audiences in the first place.
For years, Carlton Pearson generously shared his massive pulpit and exposed up-and-coming preachers and singers to the Christian world. Many of these are now the Who’s Who of Evangelical Christianity. Before Azusa, I personally had never heard of T.D. Jakes, or Donnie McClurkin, or Helen Baylor, or Brian Keith Williams, or Yolanda Adams, or Beverly Crawford, or Marva Mitchell, and the list goes on and on and on. These are just a few of the many people who are known to me and to thousands of others ONLY because of Pearson’s Azusa.
But as soon as Carlton Pearson really began to question tradition and ponder the real breadth and width of God’s love, some ugly truths emerged. Preachers and singers who once used him to advance their own careers (yes, these are very lucrative careers; they are not ministries) suddenly dropped him like a hot potato. They scattered like roaches under floodlight. They cancelled engagements, forgot his phone number, and got other strange cases of amnesia, (like how to love your brother because he is your brother and that’s all there is to it.)
They branded him a heretic, and they did it with swift severity. They allowed him to lose nearly everything but the clothes on his back. Why don’t we just put the stinking trash right out there on the table: They were jealous all along. The heresy charge just gave them a cover to express their hatred.
And while they’re earning brownie points with each other and their audiences by pissing on Bishop Pearson, there’s Bishop Pearson, speaking each week to a congregation that meets in a sanctuary generously made available to us by some kindhearted Episcopalians. There he is, spat upon, falsely accused, abandoned and crucified by his own. Hmmmmm….He looks a lot like Jesus to me.
Teresa L. Reed
Posted: Thursday, April 6, 2006 @ 1:33 pm
Thanks for the addition to the fray Teresa.
But I wonder. Is it at all possible that if we call a poor and unpopular preacher a heretic we’re bullies but when we call a wealthy and popular preacher a heretic we are jealous?
Really, Teresa, at the heart of your argument is the notion that nobody has a right to say anybody is a heretic. And, of course, if you agree with Carlton Pearson, that would be a logical conclusion.
I’m not certain Evangelicals are saying “Believe what we believe, or else!!” There’s no “or else” that we can possibly administer (unlike, say, a terrorist who may resot to firebombing). My point of view is “Believe what you want, but please make sure you know why you believe.”
I personally believe that an honest and informed search for the truth is more likely to lead a person closer to God than a cowed submission to an evangelical pumelling. My first job as a witness and evangelist is to be transformed by the renewing of my mind and life. This is arguably the most important aspect of any evangelism: a gospel that cannot transform is useless. Beyond that, it’s my job to know how to answer questions, how to point to Christ, and how to present the evidence. If individuals chose to reject the message, that’s their decision. I don’t applaud the choice, but it’ll be up to God to judge that person justly, in the end. It’s not mine.
Nor is it Carlton Pearson’s job to dismiss God as judge and give everybody a free pass.
Much of your rant I found quite on-the-point, though. There is definitely a malaise in the church, and it’s the megastar mentality.
Regards,
Rich
BlogRodent
Posted: Thursday, April 6, 2006 @ 1:35 pm
Hey Theresa!
I love it when people create their own religion and then slur everyone that does not conform to their standard. This is the lowest form of hypocrisy. You accuse the Church of doing what you yourself do in this post. You have set yourself as the standard of behavior and violated it at the same time. Nice!
You may have called yourself a christian but clearly you never actually were one or Carlton Pearson and the events surrounding his apostasy would not have affected you.
Carlton Pearson was spat upon? I did not read about that. And he was crucified? I did not see those pictures either. I am sure that would have made the news if it were to have happened.
Jesus was sacrificed because of His Righteousness. Christians understand the difference.
Posted: Thursday, April 6, 2006 @ 3:14 pm
To All-
In response to Theresa post I agree with a lot you are saying and agree with Rich that you are on point with a lot that is going on with “Church” today. I have admit that I wish Carl was a little kinder in his response.
Carlton Pearson came out with Azuza 3, “Reminding the Saints of Hope”. I loved that album because there are so many elderly African Americans who needed the encouragement and hope. That is how I saw Pearson and his role. He has done so much with what God has given him. However, this new doctrine or “theology” leaves many of his people behind and quite baffled. From what I can tell he never finished what God gave him. In my city we are still dealing with racial and social division. It was people and pastors like Pearson who to me seemed to have a true heart for the people to make a difference. I heard the passion in Pearson’s voice and mostly importantly in his worship.
If I can point to anything, I think the devil has really but a spanking on many of the frontline worshippers of our time. I am sure many of you are familiar with many of the mainstream and not so mainstream gospel artist and their struggles.
This maybe a new chapter for Pearson but he lift behind him a whole generation of old and young alike who was inspired by his songs, teachings and life. I cannot go with Bishop Pearson on the next chapter and I agree with you that I am disappointed in his “friends”. I would of called him and prayed and fasted and engaged his family for support. I am sure his mother and father are not able to support Pearson.
I will not bash Pearson but I am disappointed. He had much to offer the younger generation and the spirit to encourage the older folks. Although he reminded the saints of hope he also reminded all of us not to get stuck on our selves. As I listened to his NPR report I heard a man who became overwhelmed with the world and its problems. Jesus seemed to have enough work in his city and surrounding community. Although we should feel something for others, unless we are willing to sell all we should pray and ask God to do the rest. Our thoughts are not his thoughts…. You know.
Theresa I will be praying for you and Pearson’s church. I have to admit I am intrigued by Pearson’s emphasis on which pastors left. He mentioned that all his white pastors where the first to go. Can you shed some light on his rationale and why does he mention this in his interviews?
Posted: Friday, April 7, 2006 @ 8:18 am
Teresa,
I can appreciate your honest comments. I agree that what Christians have done in the name of God is reprehensible. I am also aware, however that Germans do not shed their identity because of what Hitler did, the Congo Republic do not deny their heritage because of the atrocities and slaughters that have occurred. Likewise, the basic tenants of Christisanity do not change because of the many people who fall to sinfulness.
I guess the basic premise as to why people are “pissing” on Carlton Pearson, (which by the way, does need defining… do you mean those who disagree are pissing on him? or do you mean those who disagree and thereby bash him, are pissing on him?) Anyway, the essence of the matter is like, in Nicole Nordaman’s? new song, “What if your wrong?” I don’t know if that is out in your area yet, but basically if Carlton disagreed with any number of things it would be of no difference, but to deny that you must accept Jesus, and to say that the bible is not necessarily perfectly true is to say that the actual key to heaven is different, so then ask your self, what if he’s wrong? Now play that out in your head. You sound very loyal to Carlton and very passionate about the beliefs and that is admirable. But if he is wrong then when we walk past people and feel a prodding to share Jesus and don’t because we assume they are already saved what then, if you are wrong? What about our loved ones, what about all the people God put in our paths?
Carlton was shot once by a man many many years ago, the bullet lodged itself in the small Bible he had in his shirt pocket. I can not imagine that he really feels in his heart that the book is not the perfect and true Word of God. I love Carlton Pearson as the Spiritual Leader, friend and brother that he was and always will be to me and my family. I can understand your anger with those who are “pissing on him” but you should really decide in your heart whether pissing to you means basic disagreement or actual insults. IF!…he is wrong, then it is in perfect good order for huge leaders in the lime light to publically state that they do not agree because if they do not there will be so many who may think that it is right and therefore they may be responsible for leading others astray. When we are given talents by God they do not go away generally, just like the devil was given musical leadership he now still greatly influences music, the talent does not leave unless God stops it, Carlton has tremendous charisma, an incredible sense of humor and a deep passion which is highly attractive to the general public. His talent, obviously has not left. I do worry, if he is wrong, because i know the crowds will continue to gather, it will just be a different crowd, thats all.
Christians like all of humanity, (because we are human) have always, killed, lied, cheated, committed adultery, bombings, etc. in the name of God. History tells us that, and it will continue. We are human. That is the fact. Look at the disciples, look at David, could you imagine if he lived in our day? We can not expec that Christians or any group will exemplify Christ.
Recently in my prayer time I was praying a prayer i usually say which is,… let me be like you, suddenly i began to remember all of the comments i have said, like “So and so is so Christ-like”, “Jesus with skin on” etc. etc. I had a realization that i believe was from the Lord, Who is like Jesus? Who is like God? ADuh… I thought to myself…NO ONE! We can only try. How rediculous it was for me all those years even currently to imagine that I had acted “Christ-like”, or someone else etc. How arrogant of me. I am nothing, in comparison, absolutely nothing. So this whole matter has been a learning experience for me, 1. we are all so fragile, 2, we MUST keep our eyes on GOD, because even the greatest of leaders don’t even come close, and they can and do fall and make mistakes.
I would love to continue to correspond with people on this matter but i do feel that if I was Carlton this exchange would be painful. So I will try to refrain from continuing to comment. I will however pray and fast for the sanctification and truth to be revealed to us all.
God Bless you all let us continue to lift up all of those who believe in Jesus, God the Father, the Holy Spririt, to be sanctified in HIS truth, and for the lost souls of the world.
-judy
Posted: Friday, April 7, 2006 @ 2:18 pm
Thanks for all of your thoughtful responses to my posting. (Of course, some responses were pretty predictable.) If you consider that your response was a thoughtful one, then I am replying to you.
Most of the blogging about Carlton Pearson has come from afar. People who ONCE knew him, or ONCE went to his church, or ONCE heard him preach are apt to weigh in on the validity of his theology and the status of his soul. Some even feel qualified to assassinate his character, even though they only know of him from the media. That is to say, they are not here in Tulsa at this moment, and they’ve never had a personal conversation with him for more than ten minutes, yet they feel qualified to assess, scrutinize, and condemn him, nonetheless.
On the other hand, those of us who do know him personally, who have suffered with him these past few years, and who have witnessed the entire transformation first-hand—including the mudslinging, and various and sundry forms of pissing—well, we’ve been relatively silent. Until now. (And by the way, the pissing goes way deeper than just disagreement; I’m talking about outright mistreatment above and beyond simple dissent.)
Once you’ve been through the transformation that we’ve experienced, one thing you shed is the need to prove your piety to anyone. I’m sure some well-meaning people will wear themselves out wondering who’s going to heaven, who’s going to hell, who’s saved and who’s not. I’ve personally arrived at a place where I really don’t care where people think I’m going. What freedom!!
If you got the sense that I am devoted to Carlton Pearson, then you’re right. He’s not just my pastor; he’s my friend. Friends stick by their friends, and that’s what many Christians have forgotten how to do. A friend is a friend in good times and in bad times. Period.
But let me move beyond Bishop Pearson for a moment and underscore some problems with conservative Evangelicalism that I had long before the Gospel of Inclusion. Here’s a case in point: On a flight a few years ago, I was seated next to a man with a very conspicuous bible on his lap. We started a conversation and he told me that he was a minister on the way to preach a relative’s funeral. He then proceeded to tell me how much he was looking forward to going to this funeral because at funerals, he explained, the altar calls are the best. People are “ripe for the pickin’” as he put it. “You can get lots of people saved at funerals, probably more than at any other time,” he grinned with glee.
What’s wrong with this picture, folks? This guy showed no sense of empathy or concern for their actual grief, the real pain of their bereavement. Instead, he was just excited about collecting their souls, kind of like my mother used to collect S&H stamps, or the way you collect prizes at the carnival. I got no sense whatsoever that he was interested in winning souls for Jesus. What I got, instead, was that he was very interested in winning. WINNING. That’s all. Just winning points for himself on the big scoreboard of Heaven.
Here’s another case in point. Go to your average you-must-be-born-again gathering this Sunday. Notice the tone of the altar call. Everyone closes their eyes, bows their heads, and the preacher will start in with descriptions of the hell to shun and the heaven to gain. You all know the script. Then he begins to call, “Is there one? Is there one out there who will make Jesus your personal savior?” After a few minutes of pleading, there is great rejoicing over those that respond, if in fact any do. But if nobody responds to the altar call, the service just goes on to the next thing. (“Oh well, that’s done, now let’s collect the offering.”)
Here’s what’s weird about that, when you really think of it. Let’s say a fire is spreading throughout your house, and there are some people at your house who don’t believe that the fire is spreading. In fact, when given the choice to escape the fire, one or two choose to ignore the immanent danger. But you feel the heat of the flames, you smell the smoke, you know that the fire is coming. If you really believe that fire is coming, then you will (if you are a caring human being) do everything in your power to get those people out of harm’s way, regardless of their choice to stay. Somehow, your love and concern for them will override their choice, or their will, or their understanding, or whatever, and you will find a way to yank them to safety. That’s if you REALLY, REALLY believe there’s a danger.
If you don’t exhaust every bit if your energy to remove those people from the danger of the burning house (or of, let’s say HELL), then either (1) You don’t really believe that the danger is all that bad, if it even exists or (2) You care much more about saving yourself than you care about saving them or (3) You don’t really care about them at all. You reason that if they agree with you, they’ll escape the flames, but if they don’t believe what you believe, oh, well, then, I guess they’ll just have to burn.
Most church people fit into option 3: They say that they believe people must accept Jesus to escape hell, but if they choose not to, then, oh well, I guess they’ll just have to burn.
How can any truly loving person be okay with that logic? If you were really convinced that you had the means, the answer to saving another human being from a dangerous fire, how on earth could you claim to love them unless you spent your every waking moment engaged in their rescue? At best, even the savest of the saved spend no more than a few cursory minutes a day engaged in the rescue of the people they categorize as “lost.”
Here’s my point: Either Evangelical Christians just don’t love sinners the way that they claim, or they don’t really believe that all non-Christians are hell-bound. You can’t claim to have the love of Jesus in your heart and, at the same time, be okay with people burning. At some level, that has to really, really bother you, even if you try to exonerate yourself by saying something wacky like “I didn’t make the rules; God did.”
There is a huge, huge disconnect between the notion of God’s steadfast love and the inevitable burning of billions of people. People tend to care enough about their faith to defend it, but they don’t care enough about it to study it—not just study IT, but all about it—where it came from, who wrote it, when, and why. Do I believe that the Holy Spirit inspired the scriptures? Yes. But I also believe that God is the ultimate Creator of everything, including nature, art, literature, technology, lipstick, HumV’s, Big Macs, and Fruity Pebbles cereal. But a good deal of what He created gets pretty disfigured once we humans get our hands on it. The Bible has been through countless human hands, countless agendas, and countless editions and revisions over 1500 years. If you really believe in God’s love, and you really love people, then you’ve got to come to grips with the fact that there are some real problems with the Bible as it has been traditionally taught. Those who care will study to see what those problems are; those who don’t care will just continue to condemn those who are brave enough to study. And while they condemn those who study, they will remain safely locked away in their Christian bunkers, guarding the door to make sure that no one gets a “free pass” to eternal life.
Posted: Friday, April 7, 2006 @ 9:09 pm
We as humans can not force people. God gave a free will, it must be highly respected, in everything, just like we do not go into the homes of heroin addicts and rip the needles from their arms, we can not force people to accept Jesus. I am a lawyer, I am aware of where to find people in “burning buildings”, abusive scenarios, crack houses, etc. I can not go and get them, no matter how much i care, i can not, just like we can not force addicts to stop using, even though it will eventually kill them. We can not rescue them from the fire we can only take them to the door.
Posted: Saturday, April 8, 2006 @ 2:37 am
Teresa, thanks for engaging us with your interesting and thoughtful dialog. I certainly hope that I have not, in my post or in my comments, done anything that smacks of “pissing on Carlton Pearson.” As I said, I respect him and think he’s a talented, gifted preacher. I also think his doctrine is wrong and has spiritually fatal consequences. Further, I’m concerned about how he testifies about arriving at this new doctrine–not through rational means, but through revelation. Finally, I’m concerned that his new doctrinal position leads him to support behaviors and activities he once considered sinful himself, such as homosexuality, to the point that he’s allegedly encouraging the gay community to infiltrate “straight” churches. If nothing else, that does speak to character issues, and it doesn’t paint a pretty picture for me. If you count that as “pissing on Carlton,” I apologize for the impression, but I cannot apologize for what the evidence says.
Allow me to address a few points you made. Regarding your loyalty to Bishop Pearson:
I suppose you can be friends without endorsing the friends behavior, their doctrinal position, and their character. I know I have, and I don’t think this is exceptional. It’s true for many I know. But, consider Paul’s reaction to Peter over the issue of the Judaizers, who were claiming that circumcision was necessary for salvation. Paul publicly confronted him on the matter, and it couldn’t have been a pretty site, based on what we see in the text. At the very least, some of Peter’s friends would have felt that Paul was pissing on Peter. But it was for cause: heresy. I’m sure, even in the heat of that moment, Paul still loved Peter, and he wasn’t abandoning him. Indeed, because of his love, he didn’t let it slide. And further, because of Paul’s commitment to Christ, he could not leave it unaddressed.
Why should Bishop Pearson get a pass? Is he somehow sacrosanct?
You mentioned the fellow you met on the airplane, who was virtually rubbing his hands with glee over the thought of hapless souls under his sway at a funeral:
What’s wrong with that picture is the man of poor character who saw a funeral as an opportunity to bushwhack people’s emotions rather than respect the solemnity of the moment, and perhaps provide a way to bring joy to the situation. While it’s true that people are at their most vulnerable when they are contemplating eternity while staring at death’s doorway, I can’t think of a more crass time to hold an altar call. No pastors I know have ever held an altar call at a funeral. That doesn’t mean it isn’t an appropriate time to preach the gospel, though, to minister in love, to provide comfort for the bereaved, and to provide an opportunity to glimpse the joy awaiting us in Heaven.
In any case, we should refrain from holding up flawed people as examples of what Christ taught or represented.
Regarding the disconnect between a doctrine of a real Hell and our failure to evangelize, you wrote:
The irony here is that you might as well apply your same criticism to Christ himself. When he had the power to physically heal anybody of any physical infirmity, how could he have had the unloving gall to actually walk right by people he could have stopped to heal, but did not? And, further, how could he have been so callous as to hide his miraculous powers until his third decade? How many hurting people did the Son of God fail to heal and rescue because he was on some other mission? How could he call himself loving?
Or, on the other hand, consider your own apathy, if there is any. Do you think there’s a possibility that smoking increases the incidence of cancer? If you think there’s even the slightest merit to that claim, why aren’t you out there campaigning for smoking reform and snatching smokes from the lips of commuters every day? Or consider abortion. Do you think that any abortions result in the taking of a human life? If so, why aren’t you on the demonstration lines right now preventing pregnant mothers from entering abortion clinics?
Now, maybe you actually do all these things and more. I do happen to know, however, that you took a few minutes out of your busy day to post a couple messages here. Is it possible that your time could actually have been put to better use, improving the chances that one might live longer, somewhere? I mean, after all, if Bishop Pearson is right, none of this dialog matters at all. We’ll all be in heaven and can laugh about this silliness over a few Tree of Life fruit-cups.
Truth justifies itself. It does not need me to validate it by crawling on bloody knees over miles of broken glass in order for it to be true.
But in this you are right: the more we grapple with the realities of Hell, the more motivated believers are to help save others from it. You are absolutely correct in that, and I fear that we have largely lost a sense of the awesome pain of Hell principally because we’ve lost a sense of the awesome holiness of God.
We who do not fear God, do not fear Hell for in the end, we are not saved from Hell but from God himself.
Regards,
Rich
BlogRodent
Posted: Sunday, April 9, 2006 @ 1:28 am
Having read all of the above comments, it seems to me that the real issue here in not Carlton Pearson, but rather the idea being presented about God. Think about it: do you truly believe that God is powerful enough, wise enough, and loving enough to save everyone through Christ? Let me put it this way: Did God, who knows the end of His plan for humanity before He even begins it, and did not have to create anything at all, create us knowing that the majority of souls would be lost? If He did, then He can’t possibly love everyone.
You have to know for yourself what you believe about God’s original intent for c