Monday, Aug 21st

Last update:02:34:52 AM GMT

You are here: Christian Doctrine Heresy and Error Charismatic Error: The Faith Movement

Charismatic Error: The Faith Movement

E-mail Print PDF

I have been asked to respond to an article on the Faith Movement by Tom Brown. Every so often I am contacted to investigate errors within the churches, and this is one of those investigations, albeit on a smaller scale.

Tom Brown is said to be an ‘ordained pastor’ who has been ‘consecrated and ordained as bishop’. Those who have knowledge of me, will know what I think of that! A pastor is ‘ordained’ simply by being a saved man (not a woman) and being called by God to office/ministry (which may not always be what we think it is). He is not ‘higher’ than anyone else in the Church, and requires no formal training in a college or ‘ordination’ by a denomination, college or church. It is helpful if he is thus trained, but not necessary. Indeed, he may have no theological training at all. The emphasis is placed on him by the Holy Spirit – to assist a local church in its spiritual life. Thus, the ‘ordained’ pastor is a minister – and EVERY Christian in a local church is a minister! And each calling is recognised by its godly characteristics.

Also, ‘pastor’ is another name for a bishop, or a presbyter, or an elder. They are one and the same person! But, hierarchy-loving souls love the limelight and love to ‘progress’ through supposed levels of seniority.

I am telling you all this because Tom Brown is no more able to be right than any other ‘ordained’ Christian (That is – EVERY genuine Christian, because they are all ordained by God into some ministry or other). Unfortunately, our ‘bishop’ friend IS wrong about the ‘Faith’ movement!

Brown is a ‘bishop’ within the All Nations Christian Church International (ANCCI), which has a ‘Patriarch’ and an ‘Archbishop’. The denomination came about because the U.S. Episcopal Church (Anglican) broke away from the main body because it ordained an openly homosexual priest as a bishop. (Of course, he should not have been a priest let alone a bishop). The ANCCI is separate from the See of Canterbury but still Anglican. Brown’s church is in El Paso.

It is also enthusiastically charismatic, as Brown’s website boasts (www.tbm.org). Another clue to Brown’s error is found in his belief that he is ordained under ‘apostolic succession’. This is nothing but religious fantasy (see my article, O-202), rooted in the heretical stance of the non-Christian Roman Catholic organisation. So, both Tom Brown and Roman popes trace their origin back to the apostles, by resorting to convoluted ‘succession’ history! I am not impressed.

Because Brown is Anglican (with all that it means today, including its many errors), charismatic, and living under the delusion that he is in direct line to Peter, his church also has a ‘contemporary band’. Or, in reformed language, a band of musicians that literally plays on emotions and is not compatible with true worship. Brown also assures us that his church will continue to preach the “full Gospel” message – charismatic. And, he will probably wear his vestments on high days and holidays, including for quinceaneras... celebrations when a girl reaches the age of fifteen, the age of womanhood for Hispanics. If this is like the Roman Catholic celebrations it will involve rituals. As Anglicanism is the younger sister to Romanism, Brown’s church will not “show any opposition” to those who make the sign of the cross.

Brown says that his idea of ‘bishop’ is the same as that of Romanism – a bishop is ‘head’ of churches. In the New Testament a bishop was simple a pastor, another name for the role. There was no headship and no real rule. Yet, Brown acts out the Romish fantasy by ‘ordaining’ deacons and priests (also defined by him as elders and pastors; note that in scripture a deacon has no direct spiritual role, but does menial tasks, visiting, etc. However, like any other Christian, he must live a godly life). He has no right at all to ordain anyone! Only God can ‘ordain’. And, elders ARE pastors in scripture – they are not different or separate! And they are on the same status ‘level’ as himself and every other member of the congregation.

I have to smile when Brown says his church will not use the term ‘priest’ because it stresses the “priesthood of all believers”. Yet, he readily uses the term ‘bishop’ to mean someone higher than others. But, he says, the ANCCI DOES use the term ‘priest’, saying that the word ‘priest’ is equal to ‘elder’ or ‘pastor’. No, it is not. Brown adds that those he ‘ordains’ will themselves be under apostolic succession. Thus, he completely mangles the way Christians are called to ministry! Every individual succeeds Peter and the other apostles, only in the sense that we are all saved, like they were, and so we continue the work given by the Lord.

More error, if not heresy – Brown says he can ordain women, but that those he ordains cannot themselves ordain others. Only bishops, he says, can ordain others. On the one hand, then, he says there is a priesthood of all believers, and on the other hand he says only a bishop can ‘ordain’ others, including women. This makes him superior to those he ‘ordains’, whether or not he admits to it, and puts him in error for putting women into pastoral roles over men.

This silly hierarchicalism means that as a bishop he cannot ordain any other bishop, but can assist the archbishop in doing so! What nonsense. And what a burdensome structure. In the New Testament a local church is a collection of saved people, with no hierarchy and no status symbols or ‘higher’ offices. To emphasise his relationship with charismaticism, he lists other charismatic and Pentecostal churches as ‘affiliates’. Between them they mix error with truth.

I have given you this background information to show that Tom Brown is deeply indebted to both Rome and Canterbury, while conveniently claiming not to be officially linked to either! He stresses the priesthood of all believers and yet loves to dress in the Romish garb of Anglican priesthood (which, like the Roman variety, was obliterated by Jesus). And though claiming to be biblical, he is charismatic, which explains why he generally supports the Faith movement. Now we have this general background of error and heresy, we can go on to look at his article.

The Faith Movement

(Source: www.tbm.org/faithmove.htm)

You now know that Tom Brown is steeped in Anglicanism, which is itself steeped in Romanism, and is heavily influenced by charismaticism. Keep this in mind when you read his article, which I encourage you to do, so that you can see what I am referring to and to check on my facts.

Brown asks an opening question: “is it (a Movement) from God?” He gives his answer, tempered by typical charismatic delusion: “If you listen to the critics, you will think that this movement is the worse thing that could happen to Christianity. But this article is going to show how this movement is not only of God, but absolutely necessary in God's end-time plan.” He does not show anything of the kind!

As one who was heavily involved in the 1990s opposition to the vile Toronto Blessing, I recognise his approach. The ‘Blessing-ites’ insisted that their movement was of God and that all critics were ‘hateful’, if not actual demons. And many critics, including myself, were demonised from pulpits, with much hatred and even death-threats in some cases.

This is how I view his statement... not that he is threatening anyone, but because of his blind belief that the Faith Movement is from God and everyone else is wrong. He does not need to threaten, because charismaticism has taken-over most churches today, with irrational and deluded beliefs and behaviour. So, all he needs to do is denounce or strike-down ‘critics’ (most of whom are genuine believers), or try to humiliate. For myself, he can call me whatever he wishes, because I have been through the charismatic threshing-mill many times in the past.

I do not think this movement is the “worse thing that could happen to Christianity”. I believe it is one heresy out of many coming from charismatic circles, that badly affects genuine belief and practice, and deceives thousands. However, I agree with Brown that God is not in the business of just building up a “bunch of denominations”. Denominations are erroneous structures, extra to what the Church really is. They are unnecessary and always prone to further splits and errors.

Brown says that Peter was the rock on which the Church was built. (See my articles and studies on this). This is a classic Roman deception used to convince people that Rome is the chief of all churches. Brown does not actually say that, but it is more than hinted-at. Yet, Brown does admit that the foundation of the Church consists of ALL the apostles. This is truth, as we find in the Revelation... but it is Christ Who is the chief corner-stone, the Head of His Church. Brown admits to this, too, to his credit.

Now we come to the beginning of many errors... Brown says “Now understand this: Each part of the building is essential for the completion of the whole. There can be no missing parts. Not only is this so, but every part adds something that is missing. This is where the Word of Faith movement comes in.”

This is another typically charismatic error: that one of its movements fills a gap, where ‘something is missing’ from the Church initiated by Jesus Himself! This is saying that God left out something vital, and so the Church has only limped along for the past 2000 years. If you do not recognise it, this is heresy.

Brown puts it this way: “The Word of Faith movement adds to the Church what has been missing for the last several centuries, primarily the teaching that the believer can receive answers to every prayer that is based on God's Word, as long as he has enough faith and that there is nothing in his life that could be hindering his prayer. This is a revolutionary thought to most of Christendom.”

The thought is indeed ‘revolutionary’ to many today, but to say that the Faith Movement brought this truth to the modern Church is fallacy. What does he think the reformation was? The truth has always been known throughout the ages – that so few adhere to it does not mean God left it out! And may I remind Brown that it was the charismatic movement itself that said we are “now in an extra-biblical era”. The ‘truth’ Brown refers to has always been known by genuine believers and has been taught throughout the centuries by genuine teachers called by God (Note: Faith is faith. We either have it or we don’t).

Brown focusses on the Roman Catholic ‘church’, even though the use of ‘Roman Catholic’ and ‘church’ is a contradiction in terms. Romanism is indeed a ‘church’ but not in the Christian sense. Brown then begins to confuse the issue with contrary information:

“This branch of Christianity (Ed Rome) needed reformation. And God was going to bring it to her. For almost the last five hundred years, God has brought to western Christianity six major restorational movements: 1) the reform, 2) the evangelical, 3) the holiness, 4) the pentecostal, 5) the charismatic, 6) and the word of faith. Each movement has been used of God to restore to the Church truths and practices that were lost by the Roman Church.”

See what he has done? He deftly equates the Pentecostal, Holiness and Charismatic movements with ‘Reform’ and ‘Evangelical’! They may indeed not be Rome itself, but they are certainly not equal to the reformed and authentic evangelical churches. To add insult to injury he then adds ‘word of faith’ to this unholy mess. He tells us, without any proof, that these unholy movements were “used of God” to “restore... truths... that were lost to the Roman church”.

This is askew! What God did was to use the reformers to cut themselves off from Rome’s iron fist, so that the truth could again be heard. They did restore some things, but the main fact is that they cut away from Rome officially. Unfortunately, the work of the reformers did not continue to any serious degree and that is why we now have Anglicanism, and it was the Anglican idea of being a ‘broad church’ that brought in so many heresies and cults.

Included in those cults were the ones Brown adds to his mix – the Asuza Street heretics that came to be known as Pentecostals, along with their ‘holiness’ bed-friends, and the demonic children of both – the charismatic and ‘word of faith’ movements, who freely re-define what scripture says, without blinking an eyelid. (See our Publications’ List for articles on charismaticism).

Again, Brown gives a truth... but we must be very careful, for his meaning of it may not be what scripture truly says: “True Christians everywhere believe that salvation is a free gift to those who truly believe.” What is wrong with that? Nothing as it stands, but it can be taught totally erroneously by charismatics, whose mainstay is Arminianism.

You must thus ask Brown if he means we gain salvation because of belief (Arminian heresy), or that we believe (because it has been firstly brought about by regeneration, which is itself a sign of election) and are then given salvation (reformation and biblical truth) because we are firstly elected? NEVER accept at face value ANYTHING a charismatic tells you, for the charismatic movement is rife with alternative meanings of familiar words.

In his background information, Brown goes into irrelevant territory concerning Rome and the mistakes of Protestant churches, so I will not comment much on that section.

This is because he says that all the Protestant movements eventually degenerated into error. This is true of every denomination and every local church. But, it does not need a ‘movement’ to correct the errors – it takes each individual repenting to the Lord and again living as they ought.

Denunciation of Salvation by Grace Alone

Then comes a punch in the stomach as Brown says this:

“In time, even the baptists began to experience a need for reformation. The shortcoming of the baptists was a lack of holiness. The baptists had so emphasized that salvation was by grace alone, not by works, that many baptists refused to work out their salvation with fear and trembling. They reasoned, as many do today, "Since salvation is by grace, through faith alone, there is no real need to do good works." Many baptists were living ungodly lives because of the Calvinistic teachings about election and the perseverance of the saints. These teachings, in essence, gave many people a license to practice immorality, or at least, gave them freedom to live undisciplined lives. Even today, baptists have a terrible reputation of hypocrisy--that they teach one thing, but live another way.”

This argument is definitely Arminian and definitely charismatic! What a rotten lie. The lack of holiness, then and today, had nothing to do with the truths found in Calvin’s biblical teachings, but in the penchant of all believers to sink into sin if they do not continually repent and seek holiness. This happens to every believer in every denomination; it is not ‘caused’ by Calvin, or election.

I believe in the biblical truths taught by Calvin, but stop short at anything that is unscriptural. If anyone thinks election teaches a life of sin, then they are badly mistaken, and need to recant of their evils. Brown, then, is blaming the wrong cause! But, he is doing so as a precursor (and reason) to embracing the faith movement.

Wesley Upheld Though He Was Arminian

Then. Brown wheels out John Wesley as leader of the new movement to ‘bring back’ holiness. We can stop him right there, for Wesley was Arminian and did not preach the Gospel in all its authenticity and truth! (See A-261 and A-262).

Wesley did not bring holiness to the whole Church, but led a new denomination called Methodism... and all denominations degenerate over time. Yes, there is a great need for holiness – but this is acted out by individuals as they are prompted by the Holy Spirit. A movement does not do it! Especially when those movements decry the biblical truths taught by Calvin: what they decry is NOT Calvin or his teachings, but scripture itself. This particularly applies to so-called ‘TULIP’, which accurately portrays the vital heart of salvation, from scripture.

The impression we get is that Brown is confusing personal holiness and discipleship with an invented movement of men, many of whom have fallen badly in their lives to grave sins. Look no further than charismatics!

Brown goes on to vaunt the holiness movement’s desire for personal power: “Many in the holiness camp saw that there were still things lacking in their lives--primarily power. They lived separated from the world, but they lack supernatural power.”

In my own teaching I speak of this power. Paul says it is no use telling him we are saved of we do not show this power of God in our lives. But, he was not talking about something extra. There are different words for ‘power’ in the Bible and each should be studied in depth, so that we do not fall into error. This problem, of believing and acting with the wrong power, is shown to us in 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12. They are strong words I apply to charismaticism:

“[Even him], whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

And in 2 Timothy 1:7 we find that this power is to be accompanied by a “sound mind”... something we find sorely lacking in charismaticism, especially since the Toronto Blessing, where we saw what can best be described as pagan insanity... barking like dogs, rolling about hysterically, running and hopping, and so on.

Dynamis, Not Human Power

In 2 Timothy 3:5, we find that such people only have a “form of godliness” but they deny the power; we must “turn away” from such people. But Brown infers we must treat them as faithful brethren. The ‘power’ he refers to is not identified, but I think he means dynamis, a feminine noun found in the Timothy reference. Charismatics usually interpret this as a ‘supernatural’ infusion enabling us to perform miracles.

Firstly, no Christian ever uses anything that is ‘supernatural’. The word means something above what is normal in nature, with its foundation on earth. That is, it is super-natural. In reality the power God refers to is His – coming not from earth but from Heaven; divine. It is a power that can, at times, include miracles, but these are very rare today. They still exist (otherwise we are saying God no longer intervenes), but they are certainly not founded on human beings.

The main meaning of dynamis for us is moral power and excellence of our minds and souls. Thus, the dynamis we ought to display is not necessarily rested on an ability to perform miracles, but on an overall Christian character, with attendant faith and truth. The root verb, dynamai, further underlines this fact – referring to a sound state of mind which should show a capable, strong identity.

Brown and charismatics do not grasp this biblical truth, but concentrate mainly on miracles so-called. People are drawn to this promise of miraculous power, mainly because their own lives are lacking in obedience and faith. They think others have this immense power, and so veer towards them to ‘get it’ for themselves. And so they fall prey to Satan, whose task it is to deceive and delude God’s people. The ‘power’ they think is from God is from Satan and His demons, whose top priority is to bring-down those who are saved, that they will no longer be effective in their lives. I have often said that this reliance on charismatic error is pathetic – and it truly is.

Filled With the Spirit?

Brown tells us that Bible students in Topeka, in 1901, studied the subject of the Holy Spirit and “They quickly discovered that they lacked the Bible experience of being filled with the Holy Spirit. They began to seek God for this experience, and God graciously met their faith. He filled them with the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in other tongues.”

This is a key proof that what they had was from Satan. I know because I fell into the same trap in the 1960s after a man named Bennett claimed to have discovered what came to be charismaticism. I, too, sought after tongues. and quickly denounced and recanted, because I realised it was demonic! The error was simple – God ALREADY fills us with His Spirit when we are saved. The exact moment we are saved, the Holy Spirit indwells us. This is scriptural, whereas the charismatic idea is not. Many occult people speak in tongues, and the phenomenon is found throughout many cults.

So, those who are desperate to have this Spirit put themselves in harm’s way, by admitting to Satan that they are floundering and blind. They will spend many hours pleading for something God has already given them (if they are saved, that is), and in their desperate state they do not recognise just who is manipulating their emotions.

Demons are always on the lookout for such floundering souls and will usually satisfy their wrong longings by imposing their will upon these sad folks. And they use tongues as a ‘proof’ God has answered... even though these ‘tongues’ are just wishful thinking, verbal gobbledygook using nonsense sounds. In scripture ‘tongues’ are just normal foreign languages, not some unknown sounds made by angels! Therefore, the ‘proofs’ given by Brown are actually proofs of Satan’s work.

Once again, Brown appears to speak truth, when he says “The Bible plainly shares accounts of people receiving the Holy Spirit when they were first saved. They did not have to tarry and sanctify themselves for the Spirit. They could receive this gift immediately upon praying for this experience. Hence, the charismatic movement took off.” But, it is far from truthful!

He says we can receive the Spirit if we first pray for the experience. This is false. We receive the Spirit when we are saved, without seeking Him. It is automatic. But, the charismatic movement “took off” based on the erroneous view that we must pray to receive the Spirit. I can only imagine how frustrated or angry God is, when people keep seeking what He has already given them!

Furthermore, the blasphemous is seen to be a sign of God!

“God was pouring out his Spirit on all people, including long-hair, pot-smoking, bare-footed hippies. This made the old-time pentecostals upset. They couldn't believe that these people were receiving the Holy Spirit without first cutting their hair, throwing away their dope, and dressing modestly. But God was filling them with the Spirit despite their objections. The pentecostals criticized Church Smith and many of the charismatics, including the Catholic charismatics. But time showed that the charismatic movement was here to stay.”

He is saying that these people received the Holy Spirit without being saved. That is the summary of it. In truth, the Spirit is given immediately upon salvation. Yet, even today, charismatics think anyone can receive the Spirit, regardless of election or salvation. (I have proved this many times in other articles). And they think this ‘filling’ is only done after prayer, as a second blessing... another grave error.

Note how Brown includes ‘Catholic charismatics’ amongst the ‘Christians’. The more I examine what Brown says, the more his uncouth charismatic godlessness emerges. Let me put it this way – if Brown is saved by grace alone, then his beliefs and practices are those of Satan and he stands ready for judgment on this earth, just as Ananias was struck down for his lies.

Now we come to Brown’s assessment of the Faith Movement:

“This brings us to the current move of God: the word of faith. This movement is an extension of the charismatic movement. It is bringing to Spirit-filled Christians everywhere the message of uncompromising faith--that believers can receive answers to their prayers, including healing, so long as they exercise sufficient faith.”

Here, Brown simply says that the movement is of God! Yet, there is no proof this is so. He is using a well-known ploy, of telling people something is the case, instead of proving it, and resorts to hearsay rather than proof. He talks about “Spirit-filled Christians”, when EVERY Christian is filled with the Spirit from salvation.

He does not properly define what he means by “uncompromising faith”. There are times when Satan will provide answers to prayers, if he witnesses prayers being asked either by unbelievers (who think they are saved) or by believers who are desperate, and who are willing to cut spiritual corners to ‘get’ the power. Nor does Brown adequately define “sufficient faith”, though Jesus spoke of faith that is as small as a mustard seed... very small indeed. The fact that the Faith Movement is “an extension of the charismatic movement” is sufficient warning to any sane Christian who knows his or her scriptures.

More error is to come:

“The charismatic movement experienced dramatic healings, but most people were not taught that they could be healed on their own faith, and that they didn't need to be healed at a great miracle service like Kathryn Kuhlman's. The word of faith ministers have shown the power of faith, and that God will bless the believers in every way, including materially, if they will live according to the Word. This is revolutionary to many Christians.”

Firstly, there is no real proof that healings took place, then or now. They are CLAIMED, but remain unproven. And many of the so-called healings are shocking to watch and hear in their raw pagan state. Secondly, evidently Brown approved of Kathryn Kuhlman, who was an avid occultist! This is no surprise, as the birth of Pentecostalism came about in meetings full of witches... and Pentecostalism gave birth to charismaticism, its spiritual ‘wild-child’. If you like, charismaticism is Pentecostalism without brakes fitted, completely ‘off the wall’, unrestrained.

Brown says the Faith ministers have shown their power. No, they have not. Most display an arrogant, blatant fakery. The rest show Satan is controlling their minds and hearts. And any ‘power’ they have is from Satan, not God. Brown says these men gain materially because of the word. (He actually uses the capital ‘W’ for ‘Word’, which means he has misused it – with a capital it always refers to Jesus Christ Himself; with a lower-case ‘w’ it means anything said by God).

Every Christian who lives truly by faith is promised rich blessings. Sadly, many Christians (and those who think they are Christians) fall foul of God, by following charismatic preachers. They are like deluded groupies who sell their souls to these charlatans, spiritual quacks who gain wealth and power simply because they know how to ‘work a crowd’. They gather followers to themselves rather than to God.

Brown says, “Because it is the current move of God, we should expect it to be criticize more than any other movement. And this is the case.” One has to laugh at such striking arrogance. There is no proof the Faith Movement is “of God”, but plenty to prove it is of Satan. THIS is why people like myself are critical, NOT because we oppose a move of God.

Do you not think it strange that Christians like myself recognise these things to be Satanic, and only those of charismatic or weak mind think otherwise? If you are desperate for power you will follow people like Brown and all those white-suited, Rolex-watch-wearing preachers who drain you of your money and time. But, if you quietly follow the Lord as He instructs you personally, you will be given godly discernment... and will criticise what is obviously evil.

The charismatic movement as a whole is satanic. It is very obvious to those with discernment and genuine salvation. You can gibber away like monkeys pretending to speak as much as you wish, but this does not prove you speak in genuine tongues, or that they are of God.

If you believe in Brown and what he says, then you are not of sound mind. Simple as that. (In scripture a sound mind is sophronismos – a mind showing moderation and self-control, and calling others to have the same. The root verb, sophronizo, confirms this by saying that a sound mind is one that is restored to one’s senses, to be disciplined... these are the opposite of what we see in charismatic meetings, where unrestraint is a prominent behaviour. Thus, to be of sound mind is to be in possession of the senses, sane).

Brown ends his article with Satan’s words: “The Heresy Hunters are still here today. When will they learn from the past and quit criticizing what God has begun?”

It is the art of deflection – away from Satan and towards false teaching, by accusing critics of unsavoury motives. Brown has merely strengthened my view that people like him are spiritually dangerous. If you wish to be fooled and to fall into Satan’s grasp, you will follow Brown and his kind. If you want to remain true to the Lord you will completely ignore charismatics. The whole charismatic movement is of Satan, do not let others try to convince you otherwise. (If you want to read many proofs, ask for our Publications’ List). I am not an ‘heresy hunter’ – but I will strongly denounce ANYTHING that arises from error and Satan. I am critical because the movement I speak against deserves it, according to God’s truth.

I urge you to reject people like Brown, along with what he teaches. Be careful of what he says, and what any charismatic says, because what they mean is usually not what YOU mean. In this way they can deceive. And beware if you are gripped by a thought that you are not good enough, or need to ‘get’ power or the Spirit!

God will often test His children, even if it means taking us through a desert period of dryness. These trials are essential for our growth and strength. It is through true godly power that we are able to resist the delusions and deceptions and become more like Christ.

We do NOT become more Christlike by following spiritual quacks and doing abominable things, or by talking in fake languages that cannot ever be proved by any man alive. (Think about that). Anyone can claim to ‘interpret’ fake tongues – because nobody can check that the interpretation is true!

Now, go back to scripture and learn quietly. Do not let charismatics control your mind and heart by imposing their new definitions of words and scripture on you. If you listen, this is not proof that you are trying to be ‘more spiritual’ – it is proof you are easy-meat, prey for charlatans... and there are plenty of them around to choose from! From mighty Hinn right down to the little man who lives around the corner. Though in this paper I concentrated on one article written by Mr Brown, it can easily apply to ANY true charismatic in the world.

© April 2013

Published on www.christiandoctrine.com

Bible Theology Ministries - PO Box 415, Swansea, SA5 8YH
Wales
United Kingdom

Please 'Make a Donation' to support the work of Bible Theology Ministries