In an attempt to appear psychologically adept, churchwatchcentral have reproduced an article that actually defeats its own objective by demonising Biblical terms as they determine them to be trigger words.
Sourcing an article by Elizabeth Prata, they suggest that certain ministries are wrong because they teach on a number of principles that are Biblical but to which the polemicists have an aversion.
Prata, having accused politicians of being false for using what she considers trigger terms, says…
Similarly, a false teacher will use emotional trigger words that allow the hearer to hear what he wants to hear. “Breakthrough” is a popular one. Who isn’t struggling with something, and wants to break through?
‘Favor’, ‘healing’, ‘downpour’, ‘encounter,’ ‘increase’, or ‘deliverance’ are also popular emotive words false teachers use. It is deception by vague language and emotional manipulation rather than a straightforward proclamation of Bible truth.Elizabeth Prata
So, according to Prata, and repeated by churchwatchcentral, words such as ‘breakthrough’, favour’, ‘healing’, downpour’, encounter’, ‘increase’ and deliverance’ are now some kind of emotive trigger terms that are to be associated with manipulative false teaching rather than Biblical principles.
Of course, this is ludicrous. The claim that ministers are merely ‘salesmen’, as she puts it, because they use Biblical terms is a complete fabrication, and is actually an appeal to teachers to stop using those words. It is counterproductive, and comes straight out of the devil’s playbook: If you can stop the Word you can disempower the ministry.
Evidently, these critics don’t want people who are struggling in life to have a breakthrough using Biblical principles. They would rather see them remain under pressure or bound, than breaking free of, say, drug or substance addiction, financial indiscipline, entrapment to vices, or bondage to any type of besetting sin.
They don’t want Christians to have the favour of God in their lives, even though God’s grace is His favour. If a minister teaches on the favour or grace of God he is now to be considered false, according to the polemicists.
Encounter with God
Healing, they claim, is another trigger word that should be shunned. If you preach on healing you are to be considered a mere ‘salesman’ and not a minister of the gospel. Of course, that won’t help the countless numbers of people who are trapped by illness, sickness and disease, even though God is the Healer.
The outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon all flesh, or what Prata calls ‘downpour’, is now another term, they suggest, that indicates that the one teaching it is a false teacher and a salesman, and not someone who is simply reiterating what the scripture tells us.
Having an encounter with God is now a trigger term, they claim. Do you see how they are attempting to remove important terminology from the Body of Christ. Where does this come from? Certainly not God.
Surely everyone should be encouraged to have an encounter with God that brings radical change into their lives. How are we saved without an encounter with the Word of God and the presence of the Holy Spirit convincing us of sin, righteousness and judgment?
God this the God of increase. Without Him nothing grows, nothing is birthed, and nothing develops. How can increase possibly be a negative trigger word? As Paul says, one sows, another waters, but God gives the increase.
We should take note that the Apostles reminded us that we need to be constantly reminded of the Word of God. Repetition is necessary to all of us.
2 Peter 1:12-15 Therefore I will always remind you about these things, even though you know them and are established in the truth you have.
I consider it right, as long as I am in this bodily tent, to wake you up with a reminder, knowing that I will soon lay aside my tent, as our Lord Jesus Christ has also shown me.
And I will also make every effort that you may be able to recall these things at any time after my departure.
We need constant reminding. There is nothing wrong with repeating the Word.
Prata quotes throughout her piece from democratic socialist and agnostic George Orwell who discusses the political motivation behind some words, but she has merely made theoretical associations that bear no resemblance to spiritual fact. Nothing against Orwell’s political commentary, which was often confronting, but he is not widely regarded as an exponent or expounder of faith.
The danger is that this kind of bending of logic into a quasi-psychological suggestion gives license to the enemy of faith to use gullible critics to pressurise unwitting preachers into avoiding aspects of the Word of God, as certain terminology is demonised by opinionated disparagers who advance esoteric ideology. There is a Biblical warning on this.
Colossians 2:8 Be careful that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deceit based on human tradition, based on the elemental forces of the world, and not based on Christ.
The good news is that any respectable preacher of the Word will see straight through this vain philosophy and get on with preaching the whole gospel regardless.
We need the full gospel, which includes teaching on healing, deliverance, the outpouring of the Spirit, and yes, people need breakthroughs from time to time to assist them with their walk.