JAMES RYLE'

JAMES RYLE'S PROPHETIC DREAMS REVISITED

[Distributed by Way of Life Literatureâs Fundamental Baptist Information Service. Copyright by David W. Cloud. These articles cannot be stored on BBS or Internet sites and cannot be sold or placed by themselves or with other material in any electronic format for sale, but may be distributed for free by e-mail or by print. They must be left intact and nothing removed or changed, including these informational headers. This is a listing for Fundamental Baptists and other fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. Our goal is not devotional but is TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST PREACHERS IN THE PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES IN THIS APOSTATE HOUR. If you desire to receive this type of material on a regular basis, e-mail us, give us your name, address, and the name of the church you are a member of, and request to be placed on the list. Please note that this is not a free service. We take up a quarterly offering to fund this ministry, and each subscriber is expected to participate. To unsubscribe or to submit a change of address, send your name and the request to fbns@wayoflife.org. This is not an automated list. Changes in the database often require two to four days to activate. Some of these articles are from O Timothy magazine. David W. Cloud, Editor. O Timothy is a monthly magazine in its 17th year of publication. Subscription is $20/yr. Way of Life publishes many helpful books. The catalog is located at the web site -- http://www.wayoflife.org/. The End Times Apostasy Online Database is also located at this site.]

June 13, 1997 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org) - On June 11 we published the article "Promise Keepers Leader Promotes Dreams and Visions," describing two books by James Ryle, pastor of the Boulder Valley Vineyard Christian Fellowship, the home church of Promise Keepers founder Bill McCartney. The two books are Hippo in the Garden: A Non Religious Approach to Having a Conversation with God (Orlando: Creation House, 1993, 292p) and A Dream Come True: A biblical look at how God speaks through dreams and visions (Orlando: Creation House, 1995, 248 p.). This article can be found at the End Times Apostasy Online Database at the Way of Life Literature web site -- http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/indexfbns.htm .

We want to make two additional comments on Ryle's position in regard to "prophetic dreams" and extra-biblical revelation :

RYLE'S "DREAMS" PROMOTE RADICAL ECUMENISM AND DOWNPLAY DOCTRINAL PURITY.

The modern charismatic prophets mark themselves as false teachers when they commit this error. The spirit of the charismatic prophetic movement is not giving the same instruction as the Spirit of the Bible. Consider the following statement from A Hippo in the Garden --

"Most of us make better prosecutors than we do defenders. While we say a person is innocent until proven guilty, we nevertheless believe the opposite. This seems to be especially--and shamefully--true within the broad circles of Christian faith. Come on, you Bible-believing Baptists, how do you really feel about those holy-rolling charismatics (and vice versa)? And you faithful Anglicans, what do you think about those ambiguous house churches? We need not to ask Pentecostals the questions because, as we all know, they're the only ones going to heaven anyway, unless, of course, you discuss this with a Nazarene. ... Now how about you traditional Lutherans and Presbyterians: Have you invited any liberal Methodists over for dinner lately? Dare I even mention the Catholics? And you passionate evangelicals, come on and tell us the real story about those flamboyant Assemblies of God pastors. ... We are so filled with opinion, criticism, debate, legalism and harsh judgments that we are unlikely to hear a word from God--even if He shouted it from heaven" (Ryle, A Hippo in the Garden, pp. 33,34).

This is what Ryle thinks about those who attempt to take sound Bible doctrine seriously, who strive to hold fast to sound doctrine and to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints, who mark and avoid those who teach error. The preacher Timothy was instructed to allow "NO OTHER DOCTRINE" to be taught (1 Timothy 1:3). That is extremely narrow, but when men seek to obey this command today, they are mocked by the charismatic prophecy crowd. Friends, this is not the Holy Spirit. Ryle condemns "judging," but the Bible commands us to judge all prophecies and teachings (1 Cor. 14:29; 1 Thess. 5:21).

Ryle condemns "legalism," but he gives us no definition of this frequently misused term. Does he mean to say that to mark and avoid those who teach error is legalism? Does he mean to say that striving for doctrinal purity is legalism? If so, he is incredibly confused, because obedience to God's Word is NOT legalism! If he does not mean this, let him print a public correction which makes these essential matters plain and which removes the confusion which surrounds his statements as they currently stand. Let him also renounce his association with the Promise Keepers movement which has called for denominational walls to be broken down.

Ryle also condemns "debate," but he makes no distinction between fleshly debate and spiritual debate. There is such a thing as carnal debate which the Bible forbids (Romans 1:29). This is strife for my own selfish and sinful purposes. There is a proper debate, though, which must be carried on in the defense of the Faith (Jude 3). In this case I am not debating for self; I am debating for the Lord and His truth and glory. Paul's epistles are filled with this type of debate against the errors of false teachers. The book of Titus tells us that a man is not qualified to be a pastor unless he is able and ready to contend with false teachers (Titus 1:9-13). When the false teachers came to Antioch with their perverted gospel of faith plus works, Paul and Barnabas "had no small dissension and disputation with them" (Acts 15:2). Praise the Lord for such debate, because doctrinal debate is an absolutely necessary part of the defense of the truth, and we can see this throughout church history. Don't try to put a guilt trip on me for debating the truth and disputing with those who promoting error. If you do this you are flying in the face of the Word of God and you will be found out to be the false teacher that you are. For Ryle not to make a plain distinction between carnal and spiritual doctrinal disputations is evidence of his confusion. He is drinking from the spirit of the end times which is promoting an unscriptural unity between truth and error. If this is not the case, then let him publish a public renunciation and correction of his own books, and let him apologize publicly for muddying the waters in these important matters.

Consider another statement by Ryle:

"Now, who is right and who is wrong? That is not the question we are to concern ourselves over. The question before us always is, 'Do you love the Lord with all your heart, and your neighbor as yourself?' for according to Jesus, this is the sum of the Law and the prophets. Love is patient and kind; it does not exalt itself, nor does it push its own preferences. ... Denominations are at war with each other because they are not walking in love" (Ryle, A Dream Come True, p. 179).

This statement was given in the context of an alleged "windmill vision" which Pastor Ryle describes in his book. He said that he has "shared this vision with pastors and church leaders across the nation" (Ibid., p. 178). He said he saw a windmill in the midst of a field, and "the Holy Spirit said" to him, "This is a parable showing the nine elements that are essential for the church to fulfill its purpose in the world." The first element is that the church must be rooted and grounded in love. Ryle says, "This is why the Holy spirit does not move powerfully in some churches. The lack of love would cause the church to collapse under the weight of God's presence."

Let me say, first of all, that we don't need Ryle's supposed vision to tell us what is essential for the church to fulfill its purpose. Those things have been recorded in God's Word for almost 2,000 years, and with the Bible we don't have to guess whether or not it is genuine prophecy and what the interpretation is. Further, there is only enough truth in Ryle's statement to make it dangerous. To say that the lack of love is a very real problem among God's people is absolutely true. This has been the case since the beginning of the church age. Paul warned the members Corinth about their lack of love one for another. Paul had to warn the churches of Galatia about their lack of love for him, the Apostle of the Lord. The Lord Jesus Christ warned the church of Ephesus that it had left its first love. Yes, lack of love is a very real problem in the Christian life, but the problem with Ryle's statement is how he defines love.

To say that discerning who is right and who is wrong in matters of Christian doctrine and practice is unimportant is nonsense. The same God who has told me to love Him and my neighbor has told me to discern truth from error and has commanded me to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints. How can I obey Jude 3 without making a judgment about who is right and who is wrong in doctrinal and practical matters? I cannot.

Ryle says that only love is crucial. We agree, but what is love? The same Bible that tells us to love also defines love for us. "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous" (1 John 5:3). The love of God is not to turn a blind eye to those who teach contrary to the Faith once delivered to the saints. The love of God is not doctrinal tolerance. It is not a unity in diversity. These things are not the love of God, because the Word of God forbids them.

For Ryle to say that "denominations are at war with each because they are not walking in love" is a judgment he cannot possibly make. Does he know the motives of men's hearts? In a great many cases the divisions between denominations are caused not by hate but by the desire to be faithful to God's Word. Why does the fundamental Baptist reject the Episcopal denomination? The reason is not hate; it is doctrine. Why does the old-line Presbyterian reject the charismatic movement? Doctrine. Why does the old-line Lutheran reject the Baptist denomination? Doctrine. We think the old Lutheran is wrong, of course, but we are glad to see any man stand for what he believes the Bible teaches in this day of stand-for-nothing tolerance. Not only does the Christian have the right to make doctrinal judgments; he has the responsibility to do so before Almighty God, and he will give account to the Lord for rightly dividing the Word of Truth (2 Timothy 2:15) and for contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3).

I therefore reject James Ryle's prophetic dreams and visions and "revelations." Many of the things he has shared in his books are contrary to the Bible, and they are leading men and women astray.

PROMISE KEEPERS IS A PRODUCT OF THE CHARISMATIC PROPHETIC MOVEMENT

Though Promise Keepers apologists often downplay the connection between their organization and the Vineyard movement with its prophetic "revelations," Bill McCartney has testified that the connection is very direct. In his Foreword to Ryle's A Dream Come True, McCartney makes the following statement:

"Our relationship [Bill McCartney and Vineyard Pastor James Ryle] developed as the result of a remarkable dream that James shared with me prior to the 1989 college football season while I was head coach at the University of Colorado. The dream foretold that our team, the Colorado Buffaloes, would have a golden season resulting in being ranked number one in the nation and that I, as head coach, would be given the Coach of the Year honors as the season's conclusion. ...

"The season unfolded and gave us more than our share of thrills as we watched with wonder how God seemed to be proving the dream true with each successive game. A deep bond of brotherhood was forged between James and me in those joyful moments of seeing the hand of the Lord bless us. ...

"That unforgettable season did much to turn my heart toward God with greater sensitivity to hearing His voice. If God would speak in a dream about a football season, what other more pressing matters might He address if we would only listen? The vision for Promise Keepers became more believable to me as a result of learning to regard the thoughts and impressions which come into our lives from God" (A Dream Come True, pp. 8,9).

In a letter dated May 29, 1997, Pastor Ryle wrote to Lynn and Sarah Leslie, editors of The Christian Conscience, and said: "It is not my view, nor has it ever been my view, that the Vineyard gave birth to Promise Keepers."

This is a strange statement in light of Bill McCartney's own testimony in Ryle's own book. I think there is no doubt that Vineyard gave birth to Promise Keepers. At the very least, it provided the theological framework which undergirds Promise Keepers. There is more to the connection than this, though, for Vineyard pastor James Ryle has been a key leader in the movement from its inception, and Vineyard church member Randy Phillips has also been involved in Promise Keepers leadership from its inception and is the President of Promise Keepers today. Other Vineyard men have also been involved. Why not admit that the Vineyard movement birthed Promise Keepers? Why do they want to make light of this connection? Is it not reasonable to assume that they do this because the Vineyard movement is considered radical and suspect even in many Pentecostal-charismatic circles?

CORRESPONDENCE WITH JAMES RYLE IN REGARD TO HIS BEATLES' VISION

The following is my attempt to communicate with Pastor Ryle about his 1990 Beatles' vision and subsequent statements he has made in that regard. Ryle frequently criticizes his reviewers for not contacting him personally before writing about him, but I have learned firsthand that he refuses to answer pointed questions. When a man writes books and places himself in a public leadership role, he must stand ready to be judged by his public statements.
___________________________________

From David Cloud, May 30, 1997

Hello, Pastor Ryle. The enclosed statement was forwarded to me by a friend, and I was interested to see that you appear to wish to apologize for the statement you made in 1990 in regard to the anointing of the Beatles. In our monthly paper a year or so ago I reprinted a report on Promise Keepers which included your remarks on the Beatles. Now I want to clarify your position for our readers. Since your present statement is unclear to me, please answer the following simple questions in this regard:

1. You stated, "In deference to the concerns of my fellow Christians, and in agreement with them, I humbly acknowledge my error in making certain remarks that proved to be at best immature, and at worst blasphemous. I deeply regret having inadvertently put a stumbling block in the way of any who seek after Christ, and I ask forgiveness from any whom I have offended." This statement is not clear. Which statements, precisely, were at best immature and at worst blasphemous? Also, which of these descriptions fit? Were your statements immature? Or were they blasphemous? There is a serious difference between the two.

2. Do you claim now that you were not directed by God in your statements in 1990? Do you admit now that you were deceived and that your dream was not of God?

3. Why do you try to focus on the alleged sin of those who analyzed and published your statement, rather than take the full responsibility for the fact that you made these public statements, and, further, that you made them under the illusion that you had heard from God? God's men are responsible to prove all things (1 Cor. 14:29; 1 Thess. 5:21). When a Christian leader makes a public statement and claims God is speaking through him, his words are to be taken seriously. It is your responsibility to get it right. In 1990 you had been a pastor for six years. A man is not qualified to be a pastor if he is not mature. Those who reported on your statement have committed no sin in this matter. They were doing their God-assigned duty. A true repentance in this matter would put the focus on yourself and your sin in creating this error and confusion. To claim to speak for God and to be deceived is a tremendously serious thing.

Thank you for this help.
____________________________________

From James Ryle, Wed, June 4, 1997

Dear D Cloud,

"Brethren, even if a man is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted." (Galatians 6:1, NASB).

Paul wrote with grace and love in his quest for the truth. We all would do well to follow his example. What he said to the Galatians was also expressed in his counsel to the Corinthians -- "Sufficient for such a one is this punishment which was afflicted by the majority, so that on the contrary you should rather forgive and comfort him, lest he be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow." (2 Cor. 2:6,7, NASB).

Peter denied Christ and was forgiven. Will you not extend to me the same grace? Must you have your pound of flesh before you rise from the seat of judgment? God the Father has corrected me as a son, Christ's presence is with me, the Spirit comforts me through the Scriptures, and Christian men and women of sound doctrine who know me have affirmed my walk with Jesus and my devotion to His Church.

My suspicion is that none of this will make any difference to you, but I hope to be proven wrong. Will you not extend your love to me for Christ's sake and be content to know that I am earnest in my repentance?

Sincerely,

James Ryle
______________________________________

From David Cloud, June 4, 1997

Hello, Pastor Ryle. Thank you for the humble reply. I know my own sin and I have no problem forgiving anyone else their sins. Praise the Lord for the blood of Jesus Christ! Forgiveness is not the issue here, though. I am seeking clarification about important doctrinal matters. The Bible tells us to be very careful in these matters. You frequently claim to speak in the name of the Lord. I will not lightly dismiss that. You are not just a Christian; you are a church leader. Even more, you are a leader in a national Christian movement. I know you must be a very, very busy man, and I did not even expect a reply for that reason, to be honest with you. But since you have taken the time to reply to me, why can't you give me a simple answer to my honest questions to clarify the matter? I can assure you before the Lord that I am not playing games with you. To me these are life and death matters, and they have been ever since I was saved by God's marvelous grace in 1973 as a 24-year-old man.
________________________________________

Concluding note from Brother Cloud: My letter to Pastor James Ryle of June 4 was never answered. So much for his claim that those who critique his teachings don't try to communicate with him.