It has been a busy week or so. So no blogging. One of the reasons for being busy last week was a "vision day" we had at church on Sunday. I will blog about that in a day or two (hopefully!).
I intend to continue with my series on Lakeland and Toronto. But just for now I link to an interesting post by Peter Kirk, at Gentle Wisdom, with Rory & Wendy’s (from God TV) response to Lakeland. Here is a little of what they said:
we believe that the Lord instructed us to broadcast the Outpouring services at Lakeland with Todd Bentley.
It was not a mistake.
It was not by mistake.
We believe it was a clear instruction from the Lord.
I can’t comment on whether the Lord told them or not - maybe he did. But if He did, was it also his will to hype it so much? Would it also not be His will for them to learn from the episode and perhaps do things differently next time? But unfortunately no reflection, in their statement, about what they have learnt from the episode. Only that Todd was not fully surrendered to the Lord. Easy to the fault in others. Less easy to see in ourselves.
I am glad they have said something. I wish they had said more. And so I still stand by what I said in my previous post.
The little experience I have had with God TV is overwhelmingly negative. I’m afraid I have nothing at all nice to say … despite being charismatic and “free in the Lord” I find them to be very narrow minded, stubborn, and very religous (in a negative sense). I felt like their public comment smacked of self-righteousness… “Todd screwed up. It happens. We are the innocent victims. Move along”. I also find it curious that before Todd’s sins were exposed, they were hinting at the great cost of the broadcoasting, as if to imply they needed donations to continue this mighty work of the Lord. Since Todd has been sidelined, these hints to give to support the mission of the Lord appear to have stopped.
Rupert, thanks for the link. I am not going to defend God TV in this matter. But it is easy to say in hindsight that they were wrong. But I don’t believe they were, in their general decision to broadcast from Lakeland, although I too have concerns about the hype. Actually I admire them for not letting themselves be railroaded into a hollow apology. I’m sure they have learned lessons from this, but I don’t think we should insist that they bare their souls in public.
Alistair, they were not just hinting that they needed money, they were making open appeals. Here is part of an appeal I received on 21st May:
If anyone is going to appeal for money, that is a good way to do so: openly and without any hint that God will bless in return.
Peter, thanks for correction and input. Yes you are right, I am glad they did not spin their appeal in a bless us and get blessed back thin.
But something about the whole thing still bugs me. Its a far cry from the Apostle Paul’s attitude of not wanting to burden the churches. “And your city can have revival too if you can afford to pay God TV to broadcast it to you…”. In the bible it seems revival breaks out where God wants it to, and alongside faithful Christian servants, without huge fund-raising campaigns. I’m not against raising money by any means, but its the link between revival and putting your hand in your pocket which disturbs me.
Alastair, I see your point. But surely we are called to use means to promote the gospel rather than simply wait and pray for God to act. Indeed this was the principle William Carey pioneered, which led to the missionary movement. Whether we should call the result “revival” is perhaps another matter, but essentially one of semantics.
Agree with you on principle, but there is still a foul taste in my mouth in this instance. Can’t explain why…
Guys - thanks for the conversation.
I probably sit somewhere between Alastair and Peter. I think Rory and Wendy are genuine in their faith, but it is style that I don’t like. I probably have some questions too about the theological assumptions that seem to lie beneath some of what goes on.
And i guess that is why i partly am pleased they issued a statement, but wish they had gone further. I think the certainty about their rightness, and that ‘God told them to do it’, without any possibility that they might have got it wrong or misheard or interpreted it wrongly, that sticks in my throat. “we prophesy in part…” … that seems to me suggest that at best there is something of the Lord, and something of us in what we hear.