On the show, we discussed how I got started in discipleship ministry, how women can develop better discernment, how to teach our children discernment, and more! Check it out!
Articles / resources mentioned or touched on in the episode:
Got a podcast of your own or have a podcasting friend who needs a guest? Need a speaker for a women’s conference or church event? Click the “Speaking Engagements” tab in the blue menu bar at the top of this page, drop me an e-mail, and let’s chat!
If you are considering commenting or sending me an e-mail objecting to the fact that I warn against certain teachers, please click here and read this article first. Your objection is most likely answered here. I won’t be publishing comments or answering emails that are answered by this article.
This article is kept continuously updated as needed.
Generally speaking, in order for me to recommend a teacher, speaker, or author, he or she has to meet three criteria:
a) A female teacher cannot currently and unrepentantly preach to or teach men in violation of 1 Timothy 2:12. A male teacher or pastor cannot allow women to carry out this violation of Scripture in his ministry. The pastor or teacher cannot currently and unrepentantly be living in any other sin (for example, cohabiting with her boyfriend or living as a homosexual).
b) The pastor or teacher cannot currently and unrepentantly be partnering with or frequently appearing with false teachers. This is a violation of Scripture.
c) The pastor or teacher cannot currently and unrepentantly be teaching false doctrine.
I recommend against any teacher or ministry who violates one or more of these biblical tenets.
I am not very familiar with most of the teachers I’m asked about (there are so many out there!) and have not had the opportunity to examine their writings or hear them speak, so most of the “quick checking” I do involves items a and b (although in order to partner with false teachers (b) it is reasonable to assume their doctrine is acceptable to the false teacher and that they are not teaching anything that would conflict with the false teacher’s doctrine). Partnering with false teachers and women preaching to men are each sufficient biblical reasons not to follow a pastor, teacher, or author, or use his/her materials.
Just to be clear, “not recommended” is a spectrum. On one end of this spectrum are people like Nancy Leigh DeMoss Wolgemuth and Kay Arthur. These are people I would not label as false teachers because their doctrine is generally sound, but because of some red flags I’m seeing with them, you won’t find me proactively endorsing them or suggesting them as a good resource, either. There are better people you could be listening to. On the other end of the spectrum are people like Joyce Meyer and Rachel Held Evans- complete heretics whose teachings, if believed, might lead you to an eternity in Hell. Most of the teachers I review fall somewhere in the middle of this spectrum (leaning toward the latter).
If you’d like to check out some pastors and teachers I heartily recommend, click the Recommended Bible Teachers tab at the top of this page.
NAR false teaching: John and Lisa’s false teaching can be observed in the many videos linked under “Yoking in Ministry with Other False Teachers” (below). They teach a lot about so-called prophecy and extra-biblical revelation.
Preaching to men: Lisa can be observed preaching to men in most of the videos linked under “Yoking in Ministry with Other False Teachers” (below). Her speaking engagement calendar boasts a number of dates when she is preaching the Sunday services at various churches.
Lisa also advocates for women preaching/pastoring in her book Without Rival.
In her article, Women: The Great Commission is Your Permission, you can watch Lisa mercilessly twist Acts 4 and the Great Commission (from The Message, no less) in an attempt to make Scripture endorse women preaching. She even goes so far as to compare Christians who rightly understand that Scripture prohibits women from preaching to the council of Pharisees and Sadducees who imprisoned and “threatened” the apostles (and in the very next chapter, beat them) for preaching the gospel:
For more than two millennia religious leaders have limited and at times prohibited thousands of the church’s daughters from preaching and teaching in the sacred spaces under its governance. Read Acts 4:18 again: So they called them and charged them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. As I pondered this verse, I heard the Holy Spirit whisper, “Far too many of the daughters I called and gifted by my Spirit for ministry have been held back and denied their call by the church.” You might have heard religious leaders say, “Women can teach other women but not men.” Or, “Women can share, but there is to be no preaching.” And: “Women can lead, as long as it is outside the church.” These veiled threats appear to be more reasonable, but the result is the same: the gospel is contained…Yet the question before us is the same one raised by Peter and John. Is it right in the sight of God to listen to men rather than to obey God?
“Missions”: John and Lisa have a missions organization called Messenger International, through which they spread their heresy all over the world. Notice the word “resources” in the image below. It doesn’t mean “trustworthy translations of the Bible”. It means their own books.:
The Passion “Translation” is not a translation at all, but more like an NAR fanfic of the Bible, or the NAR’s dangerous and twisted re-write of the Bible. The Beveres not only frequently quote and teach from TPT (and The Message – also not a translation of the Bible, but an error-laden paraphrase from another false teacher, Eugene Peterson), they wrote a hearty endorsement on the TPT website (right alongside some of the worst of the worst NAR heretics alive today: Bill Johnson, Bobbie Houston, Lou Engle, James Goll, Patricia King, Heidi Baker, Banning Liebscher, Che Ahn, Chuck Pierce, Lana Vawser, and Bianca Olthoff.)
John also wrote a devotion for the TPT blog, and Lisa wrote two. And John and Lisa have both gushed over TPT on social media.
Yoking in Ministry with Other False Teachers
John and Lisa associate and partner in ministry almost exclusively with some of the worst of the worst false teachers. Here are just a handful of hundreds of examples:
Benny Hinn (NAR, faith healer):
Early in his ministry, John served in various pastoral capacities under his pastor, Benny Hinn. Because this was in the 1980’s-90’s (pre-Internet), and because John has attempted to distance himself from this fact, there appears not to be any hard online proof (links, pictures, screenshots, etc.) readily available, but it is common knowledge and can be researched offline.
John has preached at Hillsong multiple times: “What a great night at @hillsong Church. I’m always amazed at the health of this church. @brianchouston and @bobbiehouston what an amazing job you’ve done in leading this global church. Lisa and I are honored to be your friends.”
A who’s who of false teachers and heretics have written endorsements for Lisa’s books. Just one example: Without Rival carries written endorsements from: “Pastor” Holly Wagner, Chris Hodges, Sheila Walsh, “Pastor” Caroline Barnett, “Pastor” Charlotte Gambill, “Pastors” Steven and Holly Furtick, “Pastor” Victoria Osteen, Kris Vallotton, James Robison, Jenn Johnson, Sarah Bessey, Lisa Harper, “Pastors” Brian and Bobbie Houston, Jentezen Franklin, Christine Caine, and Mark Batterson.
I once heard a pastor say that a gospel that doesn’t work everywhere is a gospel that doesn’t work anywhere. He was referring to the so-called “prosperity gospel” that seems to be gaining momentum in the U.S.
If you’re not familiar with this movement, the basic idea is that, if you just have enough faith and/or sow enough seed (i.e. send money to a certain “ministry”) God will bless you with wealth, new cars, new houses, etc. It must work, right? The pastors who push this “name it and claim it” (or as someone I know puts it: “blab it and grab it”) crack “gospel” certainly seem to be doing well financially.
The problem is, it doesn’t work for everyone. How did it work for Paul? What about John? Stephen? Peter and the other apostles? Certainly, they were faithful and gave everything for the cause of Christ, and what did it get them while they were here? What about Christians in India, China, parts of Africa, parts of the Middle East, and many other places today? They are being tortured, imprisoned and even killed for following Christ. Where is their health, wealth, and prosperity?
The fact is, God has not called us to a life of ease. He has not called us to life at all, but to death. Death to self, death to pride, death to greed:
And He was saying to them all, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me.” Luke 9:23
So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh – for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live. Romans 8:12-13
No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth. Matthew 6:24
God never promised us a rose garden. He promised us that if we follow Christ, we will be persecuted and hated. Wow, just when you thought witnessing couldn’t get any harder! What a selling point for Christianity! But this is what our brothers and sisters across the globe face every day. Many of them, when they make a commitment to follow Christ, are signing their own death warrants.
What God has promised is so much better than material wealth. He has promised that when we delight ourselves in Him, He will give us the desires of our hearts (Psalm 37:4). When we truly do delight ourselves in the Lord, the desires of our hearts will mirror the desires of His heart. We won’t crave fleshly things like wealth, but holiness, compassion, justice, and a closer relationship with Him. He hasn’t promised us material rewards here, but hereafter.
On the show, we evaluated a few videos of Priscilla Shirer’s teaching, and discussed how and why it’s unbiblical. Other topics included false teachers she has yoked with, the fact that she preaches to men, and whether or not she believes and teaches a heretical view of the Trinity called modalism.
Be sure to check out Dave’s website, Servants of Grace, where you’ll find an abundance of great teaching, podcasts, and materials, as well as his social media links- and give Dave a follow!
Articles / resources mentioned or touched on in the episode:
Got a podcast of your own or have a podcasting friend who needs a guest? Need a speaker for a women’s conference or church event? Click the “Speaking Engagements” tab in the blue menu bar at the top of this page, drop me an e-mail, and let’s chat!
For readers who are a little confused by this question, you may not be aware that there are various churches which require women and girls to wear skirts or dresses rather than pants. The local churches I’m familiar with which carry this requirement are Pentecostal and Independent Baptist, though there may be others. (Some of these churches also require women to have long hair and abstain from wearing makeup.)
The initial basis for this requirement is Deuteronomy 22:5…
A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.
…along with the general desire to encourage God-given femininity for women and masculinity for men. Definitely a good idea these days.
But, since my opinion is of zero importance – it’s what God thinks that counts – let’s look at what the Bible says. Is it biblical for a church to make this requirement of Christian women, or, for a Christian woman to choose, on her own, not to wear pants?
Let’s tackle that last question first.
There’s nothing in the Bible that says women have to wear pants, so if you want to wear skirts and dresses all the time, you’re absolutely free to do that. What you may not do (biblically) is think, or say, that wearing skirts and dresses somehow makes you holier or more obedient to God than women who choose to wear pants- because there’s nothing about that in the Bible either.
But what about Deuteronomy 22:5?
Well, let’s take a look at that Scripture using good hermeneutical principles. We need to look at the context, culture, audience, and intent of this verse.
First we need to recognize that Deuteronomy is in the Old Testament. Right off the bat, we must keep in mind that, while there are many underlying, timeless principles in the Old Testament that still apply to Christians (usually because they are reiterated in the New Testament) the particular pronouncement of the Old Testament verse we’re reading may not apply.
Next, Deuteronomy 22 is smack dab in the middle of the Levitical law that was given as a part of the Mosaic covenant. The Mosaic covenant was fulfilled in Christ, which means its laws are no longer binding on us as Christians. We are under the New Covenant of grace through Christ. This is why you’re not sinning if you build a house without a parapet around the roof (verse 8), sow your vineyard, if you have one, with two kinds of seed (verse 9), wear fabric that’s a wool-linen blend (verse 11), or go tassel-less (verse 12). If you think Deuteronomy 22:5 prohibits women from wearing pants, a good question to ask yourself is: “Why would I feel required to obey verse 5 of Deuteronomy 22, but not verses 8-12?”
The next thing we need to look at is the actual wording of Deuteronomy 22. Does it say anything about pants or any other specific item of clothing? No. It says women are not to wear men’s clothes and men are not to wear women’s clothes. Now, keep in mind that the audience for this verse was Old Testament Israel, and that, at the time, in that culture, both men and women wore what we would technically describe today as a “dress.”
Were Moses and rest of the Israelite men – who were actually receiving this law from God at the time – sinning because they were wearing “dresses”? (And, let’s remember, Jesus dressed the same way.) Of course not. In our time and culture, they’re wearing dresses, and dresses are for women. In their time and culture, they’re wearing a garment designed for men. God has never said, “Pants are for men. Dresses are for women.” Pre-twentieth century western culture has said that. So if the men of the Bible weren’t sinning for wearing “dresses” designed for men, how could Christian women be sinning for wearing pants designed for women?
Deuteronomy 22:5 is not addressing the construction of specific garments. It’s addressing the intent of the heart. Since men and women of that culture both wore garments of similar construction (i.e. sleeves, an opening for the head, and a sheath for the torso and legs), there must have been differing accessories (veils, turbans, sashes, belts, cloaks, etc.) that clearly distinguished between male and female outfits. A woman could wear those male accessories and still be wearing a “dress,” but what would her motive for doing so have been? The only motive she could have had was to appear to others to be a man.
In other words, Deuteronomy 22:5 is not addressing American women wearing pants designed for women’s bodies, sold in the women’s department of the store, marketed to women, and purchased by women who have no intention of trying to impersonate, or appear to others to be, a man. It is addressing the sin of cross-dressing (transvestism).
And that is a prohibition that does carry over into the New Testament under the heading of sexual immorality. We are to respect and honor God’s perfect and holy decision to create us as women or men. We are not to alter our clothing, accessories, cosmetics, hair styles, gait, body language, speech patterns, lifestyles, or anatomy in order to appear to others, or ourselves, to be the opposite sex. To do so is to tell God that His decision to make you a woman or a man was wrong. That is rebellion.
So, if a church today really wants to correctly handle and apply Deuteronomy 22:5, it will do so in light of the New Testament passages on sexual immorality. The church should teach that God always makes the right decision to create someone male or female, and that to rebel against God’s perfect design by altering one’s appearance to impersonate the opposite sex is sin which needs to be repented of and forgiven by the shed blood of Christ.
Deuteronomy 22:5 is not about 21st century American women wearing pants designed for women. So, when a church prohibits women from wearing pants – even when done with the best of intentions to honor God – what they are doing is mishandling Scripture and making a law where none exists. Jesus wasn’t too happy when “church leaders” of His time did that, and our churches today shouldn’t be doing it either.
All of that being said, I’ve had the privilege of knowing and, on occasion, worshiping with some dear saints in an IFB church which required skirts for women. These folks truly loved the Lord and honored His word. Any time I attended one of their activities, I wore a skirt so as not to be a stumbling block or draw attention to myself. Churches which carry the requirement of skirts for women but are otherwise doctrinally sound should not be regarded as apostate.
If you have a question about: a Bible passage, an aspect of theology, a current issue in Christianity, or how to biblically handle a family, life, or church situation, comment below (I’ll hold all questions in queue {unpublished} for a future edition of The Mailbag) or send me an e-mail or private message. If your question is chosen for publication, your anonymity will be protected.
