Charismatics

The Conflict of Desire and Duty, No. 4 - PH25-02

Advanced Bible Doctrine - Philippians 1:22-26

The Charismatic Movement

The result is that we have a tremendous barrage being directed toward Christians in every local assembly, and the question is being raised in their minds: how real is the claim of tongues and the claim of healings? The reason that Christians are in doubt is because influential evangelical leaders are not speaking forth definitively on the subject. If miracle healings are for today, then the charismatics are right. We are saying that miracle healings no longer are the road that God follows today. I don't mean that God does not heal miraculously. I mean that God has not taken an individual and said, "Now you are My channel through which I will bring instantaneous healing. You can walk into any hospital in Dallas and go through the cancer ward, and all you have to do is to declare everybody instantly healed, and they'll get up and walk out of there." God does not do that anymore. He did that in the New Testament. That's what we mean by instantaneous miracle healing. The charismatics say, "Oh, yes He does. He does do that." If they're right, we should join them. If people can speak in tongues as they did in the New Testament, then we should join them.

Well, what I'm trying to do with you is to encourage you not to be intimidated by the opposition to Bible doctrine which comes out of the charismatic movement. While these claims are made by the charismatics, they also have to do it at the expense of doctrine. This is because when you get in the Word of God, it causes people to shake their heads, and they'll say, "Well, you know, I don't see in the Bible what you're claiming. As a matter of fact, I see in the Bible exactly the opposite as being true as to what you're claiming God is doing today. Charismatics and the sympathizers are creating a powerful propaganda campaign which is hard to resist. However, Bible doctrine solidly discredits the charismatics' claim, and so does experience, as a matter of fact, over the long haul.

Healings of the charismatics do take place. So let's get that straight. I don't want somebody to come up and say, "Well, so-and-so claimed this. I saw this. I listened to Kathryn Coleman. I hear the testimonies where people tell about miracle healings." I know that people are healed in charismatic meetings, so don't explain that to me. What I am trying to alert you to is that the conclusion of the charismatics (that God is doing this) is an assumption which is not borne out by Scripture. The person who is behind this is Satan who is using this in order to neutralize believers from doctrine and from real spiritual productivity, and in order to promote Satan's own desire to be like God.

I want to read a quotation from a book called Occult Bondage and Deliverance written by a man named Kurt Koch. Kurt Koch is an expert in the field of demonism. He has dealt with literally hundreds of cases of people who were demon-possessed and demon-oppressed. He knows by experience all that takes place in The Exorcist, and he knows it many times over in a very realistic way. This man is well-qualified on the basis of experience to bring that as a frame of reference to what he finds in the Word of God.

Just as an example of the powerful voices which are condoning the charismatic movement which ultimately belittles doctrine, and which must ultimately reject doctrine itself in order to maintain its claims of speaking in tongues and healings, I want to read a few paragraphs from Kurt Koch in his analysis on one of the most powerful voices in the charismatic movement, namely Oral Roberts.

Kurt Koch

"I have been troubled for some years now by this lack of discernment on the part of Billy Graham and his committee. Previously, I had been unprepared to write about it for fear of damaging their work--a work which I personally value, and which I in no wise wish to hinder. However, on account of the immense amount of damage which is being caused by Oral Roberts in many areas of the world, I feel unable to remain silent any longer. When Dr. Edmond, the late chancellor of Wheaton College and friend of Billy Graham, was still alive, I talked with him about this problem. He was readily able to understand and appreciate the warning I wanted to give. I also spoke to John Bolton, the treasurer of the Billy Graham team, and Shultz Mitzel in Germany. My desire was that these men, as two of the closest friends of Billy Graham, would speak to him personally about the matter, but as yet, I do not know what the outcome has been.

"Billy Graham is in fact a man whom God has been able to use mightily throughout the world. As an evangelist, he commands a greater audience for the gospel than almost any other person alive. It would be incorrect to question the work of a man in his position whom God is blessing so much. Yet, even great men can make mistakes. Not every person has all the gifts of the Holy Spirit. My prayer is, therefore, that in the light of the harmful activities of Oral Roberts, Billy Graham will be given a greater gift of discernment in these matters.

"To argue that Oral Roberts has founded a university, or has collected millions of dollars for the kingdom of heaven is no proof that he derived his healing ability from God. It could just as easily be said that since Harry Edwards has collected thousands of pounds for his healing ministry, and has become the leader of an organization numbering over 2,000 spiritual healers, his power must be of divine origin, which is patently not true.

"So, only after a great deal of prayer, and after a number of unsuccessful attempts to warn both Billy Graham and his friends, am I forced to bring these things to the notice of the Christian public at large, and I speak as one who has been able to witness the negative effects of the work of Oral Roberts in a number of countries throughout the world. Although Oral Roberts is probably unaware of the fact himself, his power to heal is more indicative of mediumistic ability than a gift of the Holy Spirit. It is possible that he originally received these mediumistic powers from the old Indian who once healed him in his younger days. He actually spoke about this at the Berlin Congress. Although a number of people had begged me urgently to publish examples of his healing ability, I am still unwilling to go into detailed accounts of his ministry. For I do not want a book on counseling to be filled with negative examples. It is the Lord Jesus, and not man, to whom we should listen and to whom we should give the right to speak."

During the Congress on Evangelism in Berlin, Oral Roberts led a discussion group. He was chairman of one of the committees. I want to read the report of Kurt Koch who was present at that time.

"During the Berlin Congress on Evangelism, another very significant event took place. It was during a meeting of one of the subcommittees, and Oral Roberts was the leader. There were about 300 delegates present, ... Roberts had been speaking on the subject of healing when one of the Americans present asked him, 'Mr. Roberts, isn't it true that during your television programs, you have sometimes asked the viewers to place a glass of water on the television during the actual broadcast?' After receiving an affirmative answer, his questioner went on, 'And isn't it also true that at the end of the programs, you have told the viewers to drink the water if they are seeking healing?' Again, in the presence of the 300 or so delegates, Oral Roberts replied, "Yes." That was honest of him.

"But what type of healing is this? Occasionally, during similar programs, one of the viewers has been asked to place his hand on the television set, and with his free hand, to either touch or form or chain with the other viewers present. But this is the sort of practice one finds in connection with spiritistic table-lifting--when chains are formed in order to encourage the flow of mediumistic forces. Where is the actual atmosphere of the New Testament here? This is rather just the kind of hectic climate in which religious suggestive ideas are being bred that masquerade today under the name of faith healing."

Henry Drummond

"In the past, men of God seemed to have a great deal more discernment concerning the danger of mediumistic forces than the great evangelists of today. Henry Drummond, the friend and fellow worker of D.L. Moody was one such man. Before his conversion, Drummond had possessed some very strong mediumistic and suggestive powers. He thought that these ungodly endowments would disappear when he became a Christian, and yet, to his astonishment, he found that his mediumistic abilities reappeared while he was working together with Moody."

Remember that we have taught you that when people come out of the psychic operation, the psychic world, and they become believers, they do not immediately lose that contact.

"He discovered, for example, that he was able to hypnotically influence a person who was maybe 50 miles away. He also noticed that he was able to bring the large audiences at Moody's meetings under his hypnotic influence. He recognized at once that these powers would only hinder the actual working of the Holy Spirit, and he therefore pleaded with the Lord to take them away from him. Drummond was completely delivered. One wonders however what the result would have been if he had not recognized the potential danger of his mediumistic talents. His whole ministry together with that of Moody's could have been damaged. This example clearly indicates that a Christian can still be dogged by his mediumistic powers even after conversion. For this reason, those who are in active service for their Lord have a great need for the gift of discernment, for unless they have this gift, their whole work is in danger of suffering from the strange additives which can only cause a great deal of harm in the kingdom of God. The sin of the sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, is occurring today over and over again as people offer their strange fire in the service of the Lord (Leviticus 10:1-2)."

I think that's an excellent example of what we're talking about. Could you imagine what could have happened in the meetings of D.L. Moody if Henry Drummond had stood up on that platform and turned loose his mediumistic abilities on that crowd? Can you imagine the fantastic marvels and miracles of healing that would have taken place in that audience under the power of mediumistic ability turning Satan loose? However, Drummond recognized what was taking place. He knew that out of which he had come. He had enough knowledge of the Word of God to recognize that his power was coming from below--not from above. The charismatic movement today does not understand that what is happening to them is coming from below, and not from above.

You cannot plead their case on the basis of experience. You can only determine these things on the basis of doctrine. Either the Bible clearly indicates that tongues can continue today, and people can speak foreign languages, or it doesn't. The Bible either indicates that some of us will have the ability to bring instantaneous miracle healing to anybody anytime anywhere under any condition, or it does not. This is the artillery that we're up against. God does heal in response to the prayers of believers. He does not heal in response to a mass meeting where some religious leader stands up and purportedly presents himself as being the channel of supernatural healing ability. I care not whether he does it by pronouncement or by prayer. That's the devil's arena. The charismatic movement today is a cancerous growth on the local expression of the body of Christ, and it is bringing about a destructive effect upon the testimony of the Lord. It is aiding Satan's cause.

Our concern is to inform you about this delusion, and to show you what the Word of God teaches us about it in case there's some question in your own mind. We want to guide you away from deciding this on the basis of your experience or somebody else's experience. We're not trying to change the thinking of anybody who is in the charismatic movement. If you've accessed this Bible study, and you are deeply involved in the charismatic movement, please understand that I'm not even talking to you. I have no interest whatsoever in changing your mind. As a matter of fact, if you are sympathetic to the charismatic movement because you happen to have a relative that's enmeshed in it, or because someone close to you is involved in it, and you hate to take a position that puts them in effect as serving the devil, please understand that I'm not talking to you. Just don't even listen to me. I'm not interested in changing anybody's mind.

However, for most of you, I know that you have not been trapped in this. I know that most of you are not sympathetic with this, but you are very reasonably wondering when you see men who are powerful in some areas of God's work condoning and promoting these who are leaders in the charismatic movement, and it would be natural that you should have a wonderment concerning this. I am speaking to you, that you be not enmeshed in this. I know that once people get trapped in the exhilarating emotional experience of the charismatic movement, they're usually unreachable. If you are to be reached, you have to be reached before you get into it. Once you have fallen into it, you're gone. You will then feel that you have achieved a great spiritual advancement. It will be impossible to appeal to your mind with doctrine. You'll just be gone. Once you get trapped in the charismatic movement, it's almost like communism. Once communism wins a country, it never loses it again.

So the big guns in the conservative camp who know the deception of the charismatic claims are not speaking out. That would be bad public relations for them. Please be aware there are two kinds of evangelical responses to the charismatic movement. I want to make this very clear so that you are not deceived by these two kinds of disclaimers. First, there is one type of evangelical leader who says, "I do not speak in tongues, and I do not seek to speak in tongues." He says, "I don't speak in tongues myself, and I'm not trying to speak in tongues." However, he does not say that the New Testament gift of tongues does exist today. In other words, he doesn't say, "I don't speak in tongues and I don't seek to speak in tongues, but the tongues do exist today." He doesn't say the tongues exist. Nor does he agree that the charismatics have the gift of instantaneous miracle healing.

Healing can be two ways. Here is God, and here is the charismatic leader who is the channel of the healing power of God. It is very arrogant to get up and say, "I have the gift of healing. I have the power to heal people." So the charismatics are trying to draw a distinction between two approaches. One approach is that of saying, "I am going to pronounce you healed," or "I'm going to pray for you to be healed." They get rid of this. They don't want to do like Peter did. Let's take Peter for example. Peter comes along. The man's at the gate. The man is lame. He can't walk. The man is not interested in healing. He doesn't even think about healing. He just asks Peter for a contribution. Peter looks at him and says, "Silver and gold have I none, but such as I have will I give you. In the name of Jesus Christ, arise and walk." Peter healed by pronouncement. He just told the man, "Get up and walk. You're heeled."

Peter could also have done something else. Peter could have said, "Silver and gold have I none, but such as I have will I give you. Almighty God, I ask you in the name of your Son Jesus Christ to heal this man and enable him to walk." The man would have jumped up and walked. One way was pronouncing him, and the other way was praying. It made no difference. The healing power of God comes down through pronouncement to the person who is in need, which in this case was the man who couldn't walk, or it comes down from God through prayer. And it does come through Peter, whether he prayed, or however he did it. The result was that the man would get up and walk. Therefore, there is no distinction between pronouncing and praying.

However, if you keep your ears open, you will notice that Oral Robert and Kathryn Kuhlman are claiming that the power of miracle healing is coming through their prayers. They have a gift of praying, and it sounds like they're not really claiming to be healers anymore. Do not be deceived. They are claiming exactly that. They are claiming that they are still the channels of God's healing. In other words, if they are not the channels of healing, why do they have to be at the meeting? Why run mass meetings? What people are told is, "If you want to get healed, go to one of Kathryn Kuhlman's meetings." Kathryn Kuhlman is very pleased to say, "I don't even do anything. I just stand up there, and all over the place people are getting healed. I don't do the healing." Henry Drummond recognized the same thing. He recognized that all over the place, he didn't have to do anything, but he was the channel of Satan's influence. And he called a halt to it.

Have you ever read any place where the apostles got up and said, "Oh, I don't do the healing?" Who has to be told that? I've often wondered why the charismatic healers are so insistent on drumming away at this thing: "I don't do the healing." I think it's because they have a guilty conscience. A guilty conscience is trying to be salved here by, again, giving God the glory as in Matthew 7:22-23.

Well, I'm trying to tell you that all Christians have the ability to pray for the healing of themselves and others. No one is called by God today to a ministry of instantaneous miraculous healing. To say, "I only pray for the healing of people" does not justify a preacher to say, "I've been called to the ministry of healing." This is what Oral Roberts says. You could ask Oral Roberts, "Are you a healer?" He would say, "Oh no. I've been called by God to the ministry of healing," which means that, "I'm going to stand up on this platform; you people are going to fill this auditorium; and, because of my presence, God is going to heal you. If you get in this room and I am not in this room, you're not going to get healed." He wouldn't put it in those words, but that's the meaning in effect. The miracle healers do claim to be the channels, but all Christians can pray for healing. There is no such gift as a gift of praying for the healing of people.

So this does not justify giving the charismatics justification for their claims. If doctrine is against this, then we must openly and forcefully deny that what they are doing is coming from God. So this is one type of religious leader. He stands up and says, "I don't speak in tongues. I don't seek tongues. I don't believe tongues exist today. I don't believe healing exists today. I'm not saying those things exist." He is not condoning what the charismatics are doing, but he is not condemning what they're doing.

The other type of spiritual leader stands up and says, "I don't speak in tongues. I don't speak tongues, but tongues does exist today, and healings do take place today." Do you get the difference? The other type condones what the charismatics are doing. He says, "Yes, the charismatics are speaking in tongues. Yes, they are performing healings with the gift of healing." This is what Hal Lindsey does. Lindsey says, "Yes, tongues do exist today." They are declaring that the charismatics have this power of healing. This is what Billy Graham says. He told Oral Roberts, "An aunt of mine was healed in one of your meetings." They declare that the gift of healing exists through certain individuals.

This really reflects a certain lack of spiritual maturity on the part of a leader who admits this. Mind you, what you're saying about yourself" "God is speaking in tongues today and I don't have it." God is healing today and I don't have it; nor does my church have it; and, nor do the people I move around with have it." That tells a great deal about your own spiritual lack of discernment. This type is quite tolerant of the charismatic claims, and because he is esteemed as a religious leader, people who look to him pick up the same attitude: The charismatics are alright. They don't view it as a terrible cancerous growth upon the body of Christ as Drummond recognized it was through him.

The result is that this is the primary source of doubt among believers. So the people who should be sounding off about this are not. So insignificant nobody preachers like myself have to make an attempt to clarify the issues to recognize that what certain men do is being blessed of God, but what certain men do and their influence is not being blessed of God, and it is not in conformity to the Word of God. While they may piously draw their robes around them like a Pharisee, and say, "I don't speak in tongues, and I don't seek to speak in tongues," that does not deal with the issue. The issue is what is being done today, and the claims are false, and that's what must be said.

The result is that those of us who are willing to sound off about it are looked upon as insignificant, unloving, spiritually backward, unsophisticated bugs who are highly resented. I'll guarantee you. You have no idea how much resentment is shot at somebody who stands up and says, "The charismatic movement is incompatible with doctrine. It is false." This is deeply resented. However, I notice that the attack is not because what you have heard us say is wrong or that we had incorrectly taught you what the Word of God says. Rather, it is because what we say condemns a vast number of believers out there (and charismatics are believers), and it condemns a number of great spiritual leaders who will have to account to the Lord for the way they have abused their influence. That's the thing for which we are resented.

If I were a charismatic, and I heard somebody say the things that I have told you here, I would go to the best charismatic leader, and I'd say, "Now look. This bug down here says this. Here are the claims he's making, and here is the doctrine he's holding against us. I want your answer. I want to understand this." Boy, I would go back and I would squash a bug like me. With the information from Mr. Roberts, or Mr. Graham, or Mr. Lindsey, I'd squash a bug like me good. However, this is the one thing I notice they never do. They never go back and say, "I'm going to show you why the Word of God condemns what you say." Instead, they sit there gritting their teeth; grinding; scowling; and, showing their indignation. Over what? Not because we are wrong, because what we have told you is exactly right and compatible with doctrine. The Bible says that tongues no longer exist today. This is because the tongues of the New Testament were pure known languages. Acts 2 says it was. 1 Corinthians 14 says it was. They were known languages. Furthermore, it says in 1 Corinthians 13 that it is going to cease when the Bible has been completed. There is no question about that.

So all of this is leading up to this. I said all of this to a man not so long ago. His response was, "Oh, man. If you are a right in what you're telling me, we are in real trouble. Boy, are we in trouble." He was not a charismatic. He was just out of a big denomination, and he was attending a class. If I told you the name of the man whose home Bible study class he attends, some of you would fall off your chairs wondering why this man is not better informed. But it was obvious that in this big class meeting in Dallas, this man was thoroughly confused on the charismatic movement. The first thing he said was, "Listen. Don't misunderstand me. I don't talk in tongues, and I don't want to talk in tongues, but these people are doing it." So there's that ambivalence again.

He said, "Man, if what you say is true, we're in trouble." He said, "I can't believe that God would allow us to be so deceived, and that God would allow these people who are trying to love Him; who are trying to treat Him with respect; and, who are trying to serve Him to be so deceived. Are you telling me that God is going to let those people be deceived by Satan?"

I said, "No, I'm not telling you that God is going to let them be deceived by Satan. I'm telling you that God is not going to override their volition, or yours either, friend. God is not going to override your volition which has to decide, 'I'm going to learn the Bible and I'm going to learn the doctrinal principles. It's the manual for living, and I'm going to obey it, or I'm not going to obey it. If I let my old sin nature take charge, Satan will have a field day.'" That is what has happened in the charismatic movement. I told this man, "It is your failure to know the Word and be positive to it that makes it hard for you to look out here and recognize that God is not unjust in permitting the deception on the charismatics. He had no explanation for Matthew 7 where these people were claiming their experience. That just bewildered him to no end.

So, it's a way of getting around doctrine--the idea that if I'm sincere in my devotion which I offer to the Lord, He is not going to let me get hurt. However, there is no revelation to be added to the Bible. God has nothing more to say to you than what's in this book. He will illuminate the doctrine. He will bring you specific application in your situation. That's the way you will be guided into the mind of the Lord. Therefore, God holds every Christian responsible for knowing the Bible and the guidelines of doctrine. There are no exceptions. You are responsible. Our old sin nature under Satan's emotional manipulation leads us away from God's blessing and God's rewards. Our good intentions are not going to preserve us from God's judgment. It makes no difference that you want to honor the Lord. If you violate His book, you're going to pay for it. So, know the book.

Uzzah

Uzzah, one of the sons of Abinadab, was walking in this procession. Samuel 6:5 tells us that this procession was moving with great joy; great celebration; and, musical accompaniment. When the ox stumbled at a certain point, verse 6 tells us how Uzzah reached out and touched the ark in order to stabilize it so it would not fall off the cart. (David was transporting it in the wrong way too.) Uzzah died immediately. Why did he reach out and touch the ark? Well, his emotion rose up within him such that he did not want this sacred object falling in the dust of the ground. However, if he had doctrine which immediately snapped up from his human spirit, and doctrine which told how to handle the ark, his emotion would have been controlled, and he would not have violated the Word of God.

You might say, "Uzzah was a great man. What a swell fellow he was. He was very proud of walking alongside the ark. His brother Ahio was up there in front of him, and they're leading this procession. They are going to walk into Jerusalem. The king himself is leading this procession. What a magnificent day. The most sacred object of all the tabernacle was coming back to rest in Jerusalem. Why didn't God guide the oxen around that hole? Why didn't God keep that oxen from stumbling so that the ark wouldn't tip, so that Uzzah would never have been tempted to reach out there and touch it?" That was not so. God moves life along. It moves along, and whatever may come, you are responsible to have your emotions responding in accordance with doctrine--not letting your emotions tell God what He should be doing.

Well, the result of Uzzah's sincere intention of honoring God, apart from doctrine, was that he died instantly. Verse 7 says, "And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah, and God smote him there for his error, and there he died by the ark of God." Isn't that a sad picture? This man who so rejoiced in what was happening lay there dead beside the object he was trying to honor. I don't know if you can find in the Bible a more forceful warning example of what we've been talking about that exemplifies the error of the charismatic movement today and all the other movements that are firing at Bible doctrine and belittling it.

What was David's response? David was shocked and he was angered at the Lord. David was displeased because the Lord had broken forth in anger against Uzzah. He called the name of the place Perezuzzah to this day. Service for the Lord has to follow His revealed patterns. David should have been indignant at himself for not having protected Uzzah from making this mistake. He should have transported the ark on the shoulders of the priests in the proper way to begin with. Uzzah would not have been in this position. There is no arrogance like the arrogance of a believer who is confident that he is qualified to tell God how He should act in a certain matter. He puts his good intentions to honor the Lord above the Word of God.

Well, David had lost his confidence in his good intentions. This so scared him that he was afraid to go any further. He called a halt. He said, "Don't go any more." He put the ark in the home of a man nearby. "David was afraid of the Lord that day and said, 'How shall the ark of the Lord come to me?' So David would not remove the ark of the Lord unto him into the city of David. But he carried it aside into the house of Obededom the Gittite." He put this into the house of a man named Obededom. It so happens that David had put this ark in the house of a man who was a Levite. He was of the Kohath line, and therefore was qualified to care for the ark according to 1 Chronicles 15:18-24. This was the particular line of Levites who were to handle the ark.

So now, the ark was in the home of a man who was qualified under the law system to care for the ark. David despaired of the ark ever being able to come to Jerusalem. He despaired of ever having God's blessing. He was whining about, "How will I ever get the blessing of the ark in Jerusalem?" Why was he whining? Because he had rejected doctrine. He had ignored the Word of God. So the feelings stemmed from his ignorance of doctrine or from his willingness to be negative to it.

Well, Obededom had the ark in his house for three months, and the result was tremendous blessing upon his house and upon the people who lived in it. The word was taken back to David that God is not doing anything severe to Obededom. No disaster has happened to Obededom. There the ark is right in his house. They were living there; walking around it; eating; sleeping; and, they were living in his house--his whole family, and God is prospering this man. Everything is going great for him because the ark of God (the focal point of blessing) is there.

David begins to think this thing over to himself: "I wonder why it is that there is no problem with Obededom. Yet, on the road, a man died while we were transporting it. All of his household is being blessed." So David makes another decision. He decides to try to transport the ark once more--this time from the house of Obededom to Jerusalem. But this time he does it according to Bible doctrine. He does not try to transport it on a cart pulled by oxen. He brings the proper priests. They put the staves (the poles) through the rings. They lift it up on their shoulders. They get the orchestra out there; the music starts; and, the procession begins. They start moving the ark in the right direction and under the right conditions--a totally different response than what he had before. David and Uzzah had ignored doctrine, and Uzzah died. Now he was not transporting it according to the Philistines human viewpoint, but according to God's divine viewpoint. The result was that David's hopes were realized.

Verse 13: "And it was that when they that bore the ark of the Lord had gone six paces, he sacrificed oxen and fatlings, and David danced before the Lord with all his might. And David was girded with the linen ephod." David was out there dancing. David was out there wearing the short gown of a priest, and he was projecting the ecstatic joy that possessed the people because they were moving according to doctrine. "So David and all the house of the Lord brought up the ark of the Lord with shouting and with the sound of the trumpet." The reasonable technique of the Philistines had been rejected for the technique of doctrine. The result was that the ark of the Lord was brought with joy into the city of Jerusalem. The mission was accomplished with great rejoicing and great celebrating. You can also read about this in 1 Chronicles 15:25-28.

While David comes into the city, his wife Michal is standing at the window watching him. Notice in 2 Samuel 6:16. Now here comes the belittling of doctrine again. Let's see if David learned anything. A fine believer got killed because David was disobedient to doctrine. Now he has been obedient to doctrine, and the ark is brought into the city. Verse 16 says, "And as the ark of the Lord came into the city of David, Michal, Saul's daughter, looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and dancing before the Lord and she despised him in her heart."

Here is David's wife watching David having a ball out there. He's dancing and singing, and once in a while he turns around and grabs the baton and leads the band for a while as they play. The people are just having a banquet out of this thing, and David is right there in the midst of it. But you notice the Bible doesn't say, "And Michael, David's wife." It says, "Michael, Saul's daughter." This is because the Word of God wants to stress to us the heritage of this girl. This is the daughter of King Saul. That is her family heritage. That is her family line. David goes home to bless his household. There his sweet wife is going to be standing at the door waiting for him in her flowing chiffon robes and perfume just waiting for him to walk through the door. David is going to come home, and the first thing he is going to do is bless Michal and the household as he has blessed the people. Why not for his home for what he has done for others?

Michal says, "Well, you were quite a sight out there in the street, David. You were just like one of the common slobs, not wearing your princely kingly robe. You were just wearing that little short tunic of the priest. You really were a sight." And David said to Michael, "It was before the Lord who chose me before your father and before all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the Lord, over Israel. Therefore, will I play before the Lord." What Michael was doing was putting a little pressure from Satan on David to be unfaithful to doctrine again. His wife was chiding him and making fun: "You're a great spiritual leader. You're really something, aren't you? You're really a fantastic beautiful person." Well, nobody had to tell David that he wasn't the best in the world. Nobody had to tell David what his weaknesses were. However, I want to show you the judgment of God against the woman who derided and belittled her husband's devotion to doctrine. Her husband had just caused a man to die. He had learned his lesson, and learned it well. He wasn't ready for this woman to be chiding him at all, and neither was God. The worst thing that can happen to a Jewish woman happened to Michal. God brought discipline upon her that she was childless. To a Jewish woman, this was the blow above all blows.

Therefore, the story of Uzzah is but one example of what God does toward those who are negative to the Word of God. If you are a Christian today, and you have been having some question whether the movements that belittle doctrine and are acting contrary to doctrine perhaps have something to them that the Bible has not clarified to us, forget it. The Bible has clarified everything to us that we need to know. What is taking place out there is not the doing of God. It is the doing of Satan's spirit world. God works only in accordance with doctrine. Stay with that, and you will be preserved for blessing and happiness. Go negative toward that, and God will step aside and let you touch the ark and you will die.

Dr. John E. Danish, 1973

Back to the Advanced Bible Doctrine (Philippians) index