Category: Blog

Your blog category

  • Hello world!

    Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!

  • Did Jesus Know Everything?

    Did Jesus Know Everything?

    As Christians, we read the scriptures and do our best to understand what is going on within the text. However, sometimes we must analyze the texts with more theological depth to understand what is being said. This is a good practice, by the way. This practice of thoroughly reviewing the text will bring us to a better understanding of the Word.

    Did Jesus know EVERYTHING? When reading the New Testament, we find some examples where Jesus had limited knowledge (Mark 13:32Luke 2:52,  Mark 5:31). Do these few examples demonstrate Jesus’ lack of omniscience? Or is there an explanation that includes Jesus, the Son of God, a person of the Trinity, being omniscient?

    At first glance, these scriptures appear challenging to reconcile with the attribute of omniscience. How can Jesus be omniscient if he doesn’t know who touched the fringe of his garment (Mark 5:31), was growing in wisdom (Luke 2:52), or doesn’t know the time of his own return (Mark 13:32)? These appear to be descriptions of a man with limited knowledge. However, there is more to Jesus than meets the eye.

    God is one being comprised of three persons. Christian theology refers to this as the Trinity. Jesus (the Son) is one person of the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.) Jesus is not inferior in the Trinity to the Father or to the Holy Spirit, but are in equal and perfect union in one being as God. We see in John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” When continuing on to John 1:14, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.” “Word” is translated from the Greek word “logos (λόγος)”. Within this scriptural context, logos (λόγος) is defined by Lexham Bible Dictionary as “a concept word in the Bible symbolic of the nature and function of Jesus Christ. It is also used to refer to the revelation of God in the world.”

    So, if Jesus was God in human form, what explains the scriptural examples of ignorance in specific cases? Let’s draw back on the word ‘human‘ for a moment. Jesus occupied a human form and walked, talked, ate, went to the bathroom, etc… like every other human. Given this attribute of Jesus’ existence, Jesus has a human nature. On the opposite side of the coin, Jesus was also the Logos. He was God incarnate. Jesus has a divine nature with the divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, etc…too. Upon a close reading of scripture, is there a theological framework that accurately explains Jesus’ human and divine natures in a scripturally compatible way?

    Theologian Wayne Grudem promotes a wise and informed theological insight that makes the most sense of the scriptural data at our disposal. Grudem writes in Systematic Theology (Second Edition),

    “This distinction of two wills and two centers of consciousness helps us understand how Jesus could learn things and yet know all things. On the one hand, with respect to his human nature, he had limited knowledge (Mark 13:32; Luke 2:52). On the other hand, Jesus clearly knew all things (John 2:25; 16:30; 21:17). Now this is only understandable if Jesus learned things and had limited knowledge with respect to his human nature but was always omniscient with respect to his divine nature, and therefore he was able any time to ‘call to mind’ whatever information would be needed for his ministry. In this way we can understand Jesus’ statement concerning the time of his return: “But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Mark 13:32). This ignorance of the time of his return was true of Jesus’ human nature and human consciousness only, for in his divine nature he was certainly omniscient and certainly knew the time when he would return to the earth.” (page 698)

    The purpose of this article was to dive into a topic that is rarely discussed and often misunderstood. As Christians, we should recognize the true implications of Jesus having a human nature. He experienced all the same temptations we did. He dealt with annoyances like us. He probably ate some rotten fish and had a stomach ache. While Jesus could’ve drawn on his divine nature 100% of the time, there is no scriptural evidence to support that claim. It appears that Jesus drew on his divine nature only when it was within his will to do so in order to advance his ministry.

    There is no way one person can fully comprehend the nature of the Trinity or Jesus’ two natures. I suspect that our minds aren’t fully capable of understanding such things. However, we can understand to a degree regardless of whether we fully comprehend. The answer to the question of whether Jesus knew everything is a definitive yes, but we should understand how we got to that answer rather than settling for a simple “yes.” In this case, the complicated answer is far more interesting.

  • False Doctrine is a Biblical Reason to Leave a Church

    False Doctrine is a Biblical Reason to Leave a Church

    I recently resigned from the board of my church and renounced my membership mainly due to false doctrine. False doctrine, and those who promote it, should be rejected, rebuked, and exposed. This is demonstrated multiple times in the New Testament (1 Timothy 1:19-202 Timothy 4:14-15Jude 3 – 4Matthew 23Galatians 1:6-9Galatians 5:12Titus 1:9Romans 16:17). However, I realize that this is a sensitive topic and every situation is different. My goal with this article is to share insights that may help others in their journey. I’ll outline what actions should be taken to prevent from departing irresponsibly and what a Biblical mindset looks like. 

    1) Do your research – Don’t be uncharitable to your pastor. It’s unwise to assume the worst and act hastily. Challenge your assumptions honestly against the scriptures. Most sermons are preserved in a digital forum somewhere. Watch them as many times as you need to achieve a proper understanding within its correct context. 

    Be in unceasing prayer for wisdom as you do this. Proverbs 2:6 says, “For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding.” With a repentant heart, faithful and rigorous study, and a love for God’s truth, you’ll discover the answers to concerns organically. If these answers legitimate your concerns, it’s time to prayerfully move to the next step.

    2) Talk to your pastor – Barring extreme cases where heresy is unrepentantly preached from the pulpit, you should present your theological concerns to your pastor. The pastor should respond to your concerns happilytransparentlystraightforwardly, and Biblically. If the pastor is not answering your concerns in this way and restoration isn’t fully or sufficiently reached, the likelihood of ongoing doctrinal problems resolving is unlikely.

    3) Pray and observe – If the pastor resolves the theological concerns, that is the ideal scenario. It could’ve been a misunderstanding, which happens sometimes. However, if the meeting with your pastor still left matters completely or partially unresolved, it’s reasonable to be hopeful of change but mindful that your doctrinal concerns may arise again. Continue with your studies prayerfully and studiously if the theological issues continue. Depending on the doctrinal issue and your level of engagement in the church, each person’s journey will look different. Again, that’s why prayer is important in your journey

    4) Ask yourself the hard questions – Now that you’ve prayerfully invested time in studying the false doctrine, you’ve confirmed it’s false doctrine, you’ve notified the pastor of the issue and no actionable steps were taken, it’s time to judge whether all of your efforts justify a departure from the church. Again, this will look different for every person. False doctrine is a tricky subject to navigate sometimes. For example, denying the triune nature of God is a clear example of heresy while the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) movement cleverly cloaks its false doctrines by mainstreaming the redefinition of orthodox Christian terms and practices. They should be treated differently when exiting a church because they’re not the same.

    5) Make the decision – This decision will be harder for some and not others. For my spouse and I, it was tremendously difficult. I was on the board and my wife was a staff member. My wife and I collaboratively did steps one through four mentioned above. Now that we did all the hard work and asked ourselves the painfully challenging questions, it was time to make a decision. We found that our investigation of this matter provided a powerful scriptural case for leaving the church. Ultimately, if scripture isn’t being presented in a way that is true to the Word, the Gospel is not being preached. As Christians, we are not obligated to stay at a Gospel-less church

    Conclusion  

    False teachers, false prophets, and false apostles have been warned about at length throughout the Bible. It’s not uncontroversial how God, the Creator of all things, feels about those abusing His Word. We see in 1 Timothy 6:3-5,

    “If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.”

    The truth is the only thing that will liberate the church. The church body must invoke a no-tolerance policy for those who promote heterodoxical or heretical doctrines. False doctrines must never be permitted in the Christian worldview. This is not a negotiable issue. You’re either for the entire Word or you’re not. All of God’s Word is inerrant, and we must treat it as such.

    I’m not suggesting you make this decision lightly. I devoted six months of prayer and research, along with presenting my concerns to the pastor before I ultimately decided to leave the church. This was a process that weighed on my mind every day. If you’re in a similar position, I encourage you to use the Berean model of examining all teachings against scripture (Acts 17:10-15). 

    I’m also not suggesting you should communicate your findings in an unloving way. The second greatest commandment is to “love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22:34-40) However, this doesn’t mean that I only tell people what they want to hear. Love includes telling people uncomfortable truths. I was in a position of church leadership, and I had responsibilities for the operations of the church, which included guarding the congregation against teachings that would compromise their understanding of scripture. I took this obligation seriously, which is why I published my concerns (i.e. NAR and Dan Bohi) on this blog for anyone to view. My prayer with each publication was that God would use it to communicate the truth to an audience who needs it. The apostle Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 4:3, “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions,” and the same is true today. Not everyone will approve of your departure. That’s ok. As long as you’ve demonstrated that you’re following God’s Word, you can depart the church with a clean conscience. 

    Lastly, do not leave without going to another church. Leaving one church does not relieve you of your Biblical responsibilities of attending church (Hebrews 10:24-25Colossians 3:16Matthew 18:201 Corinthians 12:12-22). You must be a member of a Biblically faithful church somewhere. Church attendance is also non-negotiable. All Christians must be working in their churches and using their God-given talents for His Glory.

    In closing, I encourage everyone to be emboldened to speak the truth in love, gentleness, and respect. Be wise as serpents and harmless as doves so that you’ll be prepared to navigate the wolves among the sheep. (Matthew 10:16

  • False Doctrine is a Biblical Reason to Leave a Church

    False Doctrine is a Biblical Reason to Leave a Church

    I recently resigned from the board of my church and renounced my membership mainly due to false doctrine. False doctrine, and those who promote it, should be rejected, rebuked, and exposed. This is demonstrated multiple times in the New Testament (1 Timothy 1:19-202 Timothy 4:14-15Jude 3 – 4Matthew 23Galatians 1:6-9Galatians 5:12Titus 1:9Romans 16:17). However, I realize that this is a sensitive topic and every situation is different. My goal with this article is to share insights that may help others in their journey. I’ll outline what actions should be taken to prevent from departing irresponsibly and what a Biblical mindset looks like. 

    1) Do your research – Don’t be uncharitable to your pastor. It’s unwise to assume the worst and act hastily. Challenge your assumptions honestly against the scriptures. Most sermons are preserved in a digital forum somewhere. Watch them as many times as you need to achieve a proper understanding within its correct context. 

    Be in unceasing prayer for wisdom as you do this. Proverbs 2:6 says, “For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding.” With a repentant heart, faithful and rigorous study, and a love for God’s truth, you’ll discover the answers to concerns organically. If these answers legitimate your concerns, it’s time to prayerfully move to the next step.

    2) Talk to your pastor – Barring extreme cases where heresy is unrepentantly preached from the pulpit, you should present your theological concerns to your pastor. The pastor should respond to your concerns happilytransparentlystraightforwardly, and Biblically. If the pastor is not answering your concerns in this way and restoration isn’t fully or sufficiently reached, the likelihood of ongoing doctrinal problems resolving is unlikely.

    3) Pray and observe – If the pastor resolves the theological concerns, that is the ideal scenario. It could’ve been a misunderstanding, which happens sometimes. However, if the meeting with your pastor still left matters completely or partially unresolved, it’s reasonable to be hopeful of change but mindful that your doctrinal concerns may arise again. Continue with your studies prayerfully and studiously if the theological issues continue. Depending on the doctrinal issue and your level of engagement in the church, each person’s journey will look different. Again, that’s why prayer is important in your journey

    4) Ask yourself the hard questions – Now that you’ve prayerfully invested time in studying the false doctrine, you’ve confirmed it’s false doctrine, you’ve notified the pastor of the issue and no actionable steps were taken, it’s time to judge whether all of your efforts justify a departure from the church. Again, this will look different for every person. False doctrine is a tricky subject to navigate sometimes. For example, denying the triune nature of God is a clear example of heresy while the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) movement cleverly cloaks its false doctrines by mainstreaming the redefinition of orthodox Christian terms and practices. They should be treated differently when exiting a church because they’re not the same.

    5) Make the decision – This decision will be harder for some and not others. For my spouse and I, it was tremendously difficult. I was on the board and my wife was a staff member. My wife and I collaboratively did steps one through four mentioned above. Now that we did all the hard work and asked ourselves the painfully challenging questions, it was time to make a decision. We found that our investigation of this matter provided a powerful scriptural case for leaving the church. Ultimately, if scripture isn’t being presented in a way that is true to the Word, the Gospel is not being preached. As Christians, we are not obligated to stay at a Gospel-less church

    Conclusion  

    False teachers, false prophets, and false apostles have been warned about at length throughout the Bible. It’s not uncontroversial how God, the Creator of all things, feels about those abusing His Word. We see in 1 Timothy 6:3-5,

    “If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.”

    The truth is the only thing that will liberate the church. The church body must invoke a no-tolerance policy for those who promote heterodoxical or heretical doctrines. False doctrines must never be permitted in the Christian worldview. This is not a negotiable issue. You’re either for the entire Word or you’re not. All of God’s Word is inerrant, and we must treat it as such.

    I’m not suggesting you make this decision lightly. I devoted six months of prayer and research, along with presenting my concerns to the pastor before I ultimately decided to leave the church. This was a process that weighed on my mind every day. If you’re in a similar position, I encourage you to use the Berean model of examining all teachings against scripture (Acts 17:10-15). 

    I’m also not suggesting you should communicate your findings in an unloving way. The second greatest commandment is to “love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22:34-40) However, this doesn’t mean that I only tell people what they want to hear. Love includes telling people uncomfortable truths. I was in a position of church leadership, and I had responsibilities for the operations of the church, which included guarding the congregation against teachings that would compromise their understanding of scripture. I took this obligation seriously, which is why I published my concerns (i.e. NAR and Dan Bohi) on this blog for anyone to view. My prayer with each publication was that God would use it to communicate the truth to an audience who needs it. The apostle Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 4:3, “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions,” and the same is true today. Not everyone will approve of your departure. That’s ok. As long as you’ve demonstrated that you’re following God’s Word, you can depart the church with a clean conscience. 

    Lastly, do not leave without going to another church. Leaving one church does not relieve you of your Biblical responsibilities of attending church (Hebrews 10:24-25Colossians 3:16Matthew 18:201 Corinthians 12:12-22). You must be a member of a Biblically faithful church somewhere. Church attendance is also non-negotiable. All Christians must be working in their churches and using their God-given talents for His Glory.

    In closing, I encourage everyone to be emboldened to speak the truth in love, gentleness, and respect. Be wise as serpents and harmless as doves so that you’ll be prepared to navigate the wolves among the sheep. (Matthew 10:16

  • Dan Bohi, Becoming Love Ministries, and Fiscal Excesses

    Dan Bohi, Becoming Love Ministries, and Fiscal Excesses

    This article will examine NAR evangelist Dan Bohi’s ministry, Becoming Love Ministries. Anyone who feels called into formal ministry must choose a vehicle by which to do it. You can involve yourself in the ministries of your local church, start an apologetics blog, host a small group, or launch an independent ministry. In this case, Bohi founded Becoming Love Ministries. 

    In the prior article about Bohi, I detailed the serious red flags related to his theology on the NAR, faith healings, and impartations. In this article, I will detail the organizational red flags of Becoming Love Ministries. When there is smoke, there is inevitably fire; and a fire is burning in the pockets of Becoming Love Ministries. 

    Becoming Love Ministries

    I began by reviewing Becoming Love Ministries’ website. I would generally describe the “Statement of Faith” as being consistent with orthodox Christianity. It appears to be thoughtfully written and theologically sound. For this, I applaud Bohi. Every Christian ministry needs to have a Biblically orthodox statement of faith. In this regard, Becoming Love Ministries has done well. However, does Bohi and his ministry operate in a Biblically consistent way? 

    Is Becoming Love Ministries a good steward of its donations? Upon review of the publicly available finances, it became clear that there were red flags. Charity Navigator gave Becoming Love Ministries a failing score on their “Finance & Accountability” section. ProPublica publishes publicly available tax information for nonprofits. 2019 was the last recorded year with accessible tax documentation. Dan Bohi, the founder of Becoming Love Ministries, was compensated $259,589. To put it in perspective, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated the median annual wage for clergy in 2021 was $49,720. Bohi is earning $209,869 more than the median annual wage for clergy. In 2021, the U.S. median annual wage was $45,760. In 2022, the median U.S. household income is $61,937. The average salary in 2021 for a doctor is $229,311. Statistically, Bohi easily falls within the top 10 percent of income earners. Lastly, so I can make a strict apples-to-apples comparison, the average salary for a founder of a nonprofit is $147,241, which is $112,348 less than Bohi’s salary. 

    Perceptions are very important in ministry. Christian clergy (i.e. staff pastors) commonly accompanies a lower salary. Personally, I feel pastors are underpaid for their work due to the eternal importance of what they do, but that is the nature of being clergy. They’ve committed themselves to God because it’s a calling. So, there is no dispute about whether pastors should be adequately compensated for feeding the souls of their flock with the word of God. My concern about Bohi’s salary is that his compensation is considerably more than 90% of the U.S. population. Again, perceptions are important in ministry. When every available economic metric suggests that Bohi is earning roughly five times the median annual income of an average clergyman, it’s not unreasonable to inquire about why Bohi accepted such an excessively high salary.

    Conclusion

    Referring back to my introduction, Bohi will have a higher degree of accountability due to his tenure in the faith and the position he holds. Questions about finances will arise because his compensation is dramatically disproportionate to others performing the same or similar tasks. 

    My prayer is that Bohi is placing his wealth in God’s hands for good use. In light of that prayer, nobody should ignore that his finances are a red flag due to economic disparities. His excessively high salary dwarfs the average clergyman’s salary by a magnitude of five. Is this a responsible stewardship of the donations Becoming Love Ministries receives? If I was on the board of Becoming Love Ministries, I would vehemently oppose this level of compensation in lieu of a prudent level of compensation commensurate with his occupation. This demonstration of fiscal irresponsibility is a red flag, especially when accompanied by many false teachings

  • Dan Bohi and Impartations

    Dan Bohi and Impartations

    NAR evangelist Dan Bohi’s impartation ministry is a foreign concept for most Christians in the Nazarene denomination. I never heard of impartations until I came to my home church. The word was used occasionally by my pastor but it was excessively used by those in NAR circles, especially among Dan Bohi. Impartations are becoming more frequently referenced in my home church, likely due to Bohi’s influence.

    I’ll examine Bohi’s theological claims about impartations in his book Holiness and Healing, co-authored by NAR Nazarene pastor Rob McCorkle. As I’ve done throughout this series, I’ll cite quotes directly from his book alongside their corresponding page numbers for your reference. 

    Impartations

    Concerning impartations, Bohi says, “It simply means to impart or to give. Paul talked about his desire to impart or to give a supernatural gift to the Christians in Rome. (Romans 1:11)” (page 126) Now that we have a basic definition from Bohi along with a scriptural citation, let’s examine his prooftext closely.

    Given that it’s never a wise exegetical practice to cite a singular prooftext due to the risk of taking scriptures out of context, I’ll provide Romans 1:8-15 with verse 11 highlighted,

    “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world. For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I mention you always in my prayers, asking that somehow by God’s will I may now at last succeed in coming to you. For I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you—  that is, that we may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith, both yours and mine. I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that I have often intended to come to you (but thus far have been prevented), in order that I may reap some harvest among you as well as among the rest of the Gentiles. I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. So I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome.”

     Given the context of Bohi’s prooftext, does it sound like he provided a sound Biblical interpretation of the scripture? No. The ESV Study Bible comments on verses 11 – 12, “mutually encouraged – Paul desires as an apostle to encourage the Christians in Rome, but it is also noteworthy that their faith serves to inspire and strengthen him as well.” (page 2158) This is not a passage that can be used to reinforce the practice of impartation as defined by Bohi.

    Holiness and Healing describe how McCorkle took his church staff to a Healing and Impartation School led by Randy Clark, another influential NAR personality. McCorkle said that during one of the services, “I went up and interrupted his message with my hands held out ready to receive. We have already talked about manifestations, but I remember Randy blew on me like Jesus did His disciples (see John 20:22)”. (page 129) There is a disturbing implication of this story. John 20:22 states, “And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.”” He’s equating Clark to Jesus in actions and authority. Bohi affirms McCorkle on page 141 when he says this passage is the “template for impartation.” McCorkle continues, 

    “Listen, he blew on me, and I fell on the ground and couldn’t move for about forty-five minutes! I remember people started coming forward and were standing around me, but I was incapacitated. I was resting in God’s presence. I was out, Dan! I couldn’t move! I remember thinking that if my staff told anyone what happened to me, I would fire them. Finally, when I was able to stand up, Randy laid hands on me and started praying a prophetic prayer that I would be used by God to redig the wells in the Holiness movement…About twenty minutes later, he found my wife, and he prophesied the same thing over her. That was an impartation that has forever changed my life.” (page 129 – 130)

    Bohi described his personalized impartation with the same person, Randy Clark, but it was through a phone call conversation. During this conversation, Clark “prayed for a thousandfold increase in my ministry, and he prayed that the demonic realm would be pushed back, the kingdom of God would come, and revival would break out wherever I went. He prayed that the healings and miracles Jesus did with His disciples would start occurring in the Church of the Nazarene and beyond.” (page 133)

    Shortly after Clark imparted on Bohi, Bohi claims his ministry was catapulted into the supernatural. Bohi describes how his ministry was changed, 

    “The next few weeks after Randy’s prayer were amazing. I immediately went to this revival in Waco, Texas. I had a word of knowledge for someone’s stomach and the lady was completely healed. In that same meeting, someone’s deaf ear was opened. Then I went to Wichita Falls, Texas, and during that meeting a little boy’s eyes were healed and he was able to see. From there, I went to Tyler, Texas, and prayed over a man with Parkinson’s disease, and he was touched. He was completely healed and stopped shaking. Then I went to Ovilla, Texas, where I saw a lady get out of a wheelchair. In Athens, Texas, God’s power fused the heel bone of a worship leader. After that meeting, I went to Gilmore, Texas, and the pastor’s back was healed. In Denison, Texas, a lady’s arms were healed from nerve damage. While in Odessa, Texas, a seventy-year-old woman with neuropathy was healed. In Belton, Texas, a retired district superintendent’s cancer was healed.” (page 135 – 136)

    These are pretty miraculous claims resulting from a phone call impartation, especially with no scriptural support. Bohi states that he usually does impartations at the end of all of his services, he writes,

    “But before I call people forward to pray an impartation over them, I give them two warnings. Obviously, people have to be hungry to receive from God. I don’t force anyone to receive an impartation. People have to desire more of God, or otherwise, an impartation is fruitless.” (page 143)

    This clip demonstrates what a call for impartation at the end of Bohi’s service looks like.

    In this video, Bohi openly says that he wants to do impartations and transfer the “anointing” because the “anointing is transferrable.” This peculiar impartation transaction he’s describing between himself and others is void of any scriptural support. Bohi admits that this theology is controversial, but trivializes it because “the controversy only occurs when people don’t know the Word. There are many people who call themselves students of the Word, but they don’t even know what is actually in the Word.” (page 145) This is the theological gaslighting that keeps the NAR alive and well.

    Conclusion

    In the Evangelical Journal of Theology, Ervin Budiselić wrote a paper titled, The Impartation of the Gifts of the Spirit in Paul’s Theology, he concluded, 

    “Impartation lacks any biblical support because this doctrine is based solely on a verb that is only used five times in the NT and only one time in connection with the gifts of the Spirit (Rom 1:11). The only way that support for impartation can be found in the Bible is to take this word and attach certain ideas and meanings to it, and then to read back into the text this meaning wherever that fits with the impartation argument. But in this way, the Bible is forced to teach what it does not actually teach. Furthermore, the Bible does not mention the gift of impartation, how impartation happens, who the properly authorized persons are who can impart anointing, gifts, etc., nor how an average believer can recognize and discern these authorized impartation experts. All such teaching is made up and added to the Scriptures.” (page 265)

    Bohi, once again, has failed to make any credible scriptural case for his theology. My research of Bohi and his practice of impartations has given me a respect for how easily people will believe anything. 2 Timothy 4:3 comes immediately to mind, “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions.” Bohi is scratching those itching ears eagerly. The only reason why people endure these unsound doctrines is that it suits their fancy. 

  • Dan Bohi and Healing

    Dan Bohi and Healing

    Continuing with this series on NAR evangelist Dan Bohi, I’ll provide a comprehensive review of Bohi’s healing theology and provide an assessment of the claims he’s made about his healing ministry. I’ll directly cite Bohi’s book titled Holiness and Healing along with videos of him speaking about his healings. I’ve taken great efforts to cite Bohi in his own words by carefully studying his book and watching his online material. I’ve provided page numbers for every quote so anyone willing can easily access the material I’m citing. As I mentioned in my introduction, my goal is to hold Bohi proportionately accountable for his theology in a way that is commensurate to his tenure in the faith and his role within the church as a professional evangelist. Now, let’s examine Dan’s theology of healing.

    Bohi’s Healing Theology

    Bohi and his like-minded companion Rob McCorkle are theologically identical in every way as far as I can tell from reading their book, Holiness and Healing. This is especially true as it relates to the topic of faith healing. While I will be speaking specifically about Bohi in this article, everything that applies to Bohi equally applies to McCorkle within the context of this article. 

    Bohi gives seven reasons why he believes that God still heals today. Let’s work our way down Bohi’s list and test whether his reasons stand the test of Biblically scrutiny. 

    1) Bohi believes in healing because “it is God’s will to heal” (page 235). Does God always will everyone to be healed in this life? No. That’s an obvious and indisputable fact. If God willed everyone to be healed, there would be no illness. Bohi’s position is that it’s always God’s will to heal because “originally and eternally God’s will was, and will be, for wholeness and healing” (page 235). Bohi cites Matthew 6:10 to demonstrate that Jesus corroborates his view when He says, “Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” According to Bohi, if it’s always God’s will to heal and the kingdom of God is free of illness, healing is possible if we are capable of manifesting “the kingdom of God in this present age” (page 240). McCorkle affirms Bohi’s statement by saying, “If He manifested the kingdom of God in this present age, then our commission is the same” (page 241).

    Looking at Bohi’s words closely, he assumes that God’s will is to physically heal everyone on earth because he’s using Matthew 6:10 as a prooftext to conclude that since there is no illness in the kingdom, therefore God’s sovereign will wouldn’t include the allowance of illness on earth. Bohi theorizes that since Jesus manifested the kingdom of God in the present age, we’re Biblically called to manifest the kingdom of God in an identical way. The ESV Study Bible provides some excellent insights on Matthew 6:10 that clear up Bohi’s confusion,

    “Christians are called to pray and work for the continual advance of God’s kingdom on earth. The presence of God’s kingdom in this age refers to the reign of Christ in the hearts and lives of believers, and to the reigning presence of Christ in his body, the church – so that they increasingly reflect his love, obey his laws, honor him, do good for all people, and proclaim the good news of the kingdom. The third petition speaks of God’s will. This means God’s “revealed will”, which involves conduct that is pleasing to him as revealed in scripture. Just as God’s will is perfectly experienced in heaven, Jesus prays that it will be experienced on earthThe will of God will be expressed in its fullness only when God’s kingdom comes in its final form, when Christ returns in power and great glory (see Matt. 24:30; cf. Rom. 8:18-25; Rev. 20:1-10), but it will increasingly be seen in this age as well (Matt. 13:31-33).” (pages 1831 – 1832 — emphasis mine)

    While we may see more of God’s kingdom manifested on earth increasingly over time, we’ll never fully see God’s kingdom in its final form until Christ returns. While there is nothing unbiblical about praying for healing, we must never assume that God’s will includes healing in every circumstance. This is not the case and nor is it Biblically supported by the scriptures.

    2) Bohi believes in healing because “Jesus demonstrated it” (page 243). Jesus did demonstrate healing, however, does this mean that we have the same healing model in the modern world? There is no reason to believe that’s true. Simply because Jesus did something doesn’t mean we can do it too. This is an assumption without any biblical prooftext.

    Bohi states, “If 40 percent of the gospels are about the miracles of Jesus then I think that they are important, and we should be wondering how, why, and what happened to us if we’re not duplicating what Jesus did. The question is: are we really Christlike disciples?” (page 244 – emphasis mine) He continues by saying, “In John 14:12, Jesus said that if anyone believed in Him, and that is present tense faith (meaning that if we are believing Him), then they would do what he did. So if we are intimate enough with Jesus and lean into Him with faith, then we will do what he did and even greater. That means “anyone” who believes in Him.” (page 244) 

    Referring back to the ESV Study Bible again for clarification on John 14:12,

    the works that I do. In John’s Gospel, the term “works” (Gk. ergon), both in singular and in plural, is a broader term than “signs.” While “signs” in John are characteristically miracles that attest to Jesus’ identity as Messiah and the Son of God, and that lead unbelievers to faith, Jesus’ “works” include both his miracles and his other activities and teachings, including the whole of his ministry. These are all manifestations of the activity of God the Father, for Jesus said, “The Father dwells in me does his works” (14:10). Here Jesus is teaching his disciples to imitate the things he did in his life and ministry. The disciples’ greater works will be possible because Jesus is going to the Father, subsequent to his finished work on the cross; this indicates that the “greater works” will be possible because of the power of the Holy Spirit who would be sent after Jesus goes to the Father. The expression “greater works” could be translated broadly as “greater things,” since the Greek meizona is simply a neuter adjective and the noun “works” (Gk. erga, plural) is not included here as it is in the earlier part of the verse. These “greater works” include evangelism, teaching, and deeds of mercy and compassion – in short, the entire ministry of the church to the entire world, beginning at Pentecost (E.g., on the day of Pentecost alone, more believers were added to Jesus’ followers than during his entire earthly ministry up to that time; cf. Acts 2:41.) These works are “greater” not because they are more amazing miracles but because they will be greater in their worldwide scope and will result in the transformation of individual lives and of whole cultures and societies” (pages 2052 – 2053 — emphasis mine)

    In light of the proper context, Bohi’s glamorized view of us being functionally equivalent to Jesus is farcical at best and arguably heretical at worst. Bohi pays no attention to the fact that there were individuals within the early church in the presence of apostles who remained ill. Paul describes in 2 Corinthians 4:16 that “Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day” demonstrating that their physical bodies were failing. This wouldn’t have been mentioned if they were physically healed. Similarly, Paul writes to Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:23 and says, “No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.” Again, Timothy wasn’t healed miraculously but was being encouraged to treat his ailments medicinally. Lastly, Paul wrote to Timothy again in 2 Timothy 4:20 and said, “Erastus remained at Corinth, and I left Trophimus, who was ill, at Miletus.” The ESV Study Bible states, “Even Paul, with his apostolic gifts (cf. Acts 19:11-12; 2 Cor. 12:12) was not always empowered to heal. Christians today should pray earnestly for physical healing, but God is still sovereign in whether he grants healing in each specific case.” (page 2343 — emphasis mine). Would Bohi suggest that the Apostle Paul misunderstood Christ’s healing model?

    3) Bohi believes in healing because of “the kingdom” (page 249). He repeats many of the same points found in his first point concerning bringing God’s kingdom down to earth. Bohi states, “In Matthew 10, Jesus commissioned us to preach, teach, and do ministry. He was saying: I’m going to give you all the authority that I have because I can’t do this by myself. I can’t cover the world without helpers” (page 249 – emphasis mine). For a matter of clarity, I’m going to cite what Bohi’s referencing in Matthew 10:1,

    And he called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction.” (ESV)

    Bohi made a common exegetical error of substituting a description with a prescription. In Matthew 10, Jesus gave them, the twelve apostles, authority over “unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction.” There isn’t a scripture in Matthew 10 that prescribes authority to us in this way.

    4) Bohi believes in healing “because of authority” (page 252). Bohi believes that we have the same authority as Jesus, so we should always expect Jesus-like healings. Bohi states, “There are three times in the gospels where we are told that a student is never above His teacher, but when we are fully trained, we will be exactly like Him. Jesus said that!” (page 257 — emphasis mine) He makes this comment without reference to any scriptures to substantiate his Biblical assertion that “fully trained” students can become “exactly like Jesus.” Bohi opines about why people don’t “operate with this divine authority that Jesus has given to us.” His ironic response is that “people in the church don’t use the authority that they have because they are biblically illiterate.” (page 257 — emphasis mine) 

    Bohi provides a lot of insight into what he thinks are Biblical messages about how we have the authority to heal, but he is guilty of the very thing he accuses people of being. He’s biblically illiterate. Again, he takes historical descriptions of the apostles who were given authority to heal and imports that same authority upon us without providing any prooftexts for how his claim can be biblically reconciled. 

    5) Bohi believes in healing “because of faith” (page 259). Bohi states that prayer will only function among the faithful. Indeed, there is Biblical support for having faith. This is a virtue and I don’t trivialize the point that Bohi is making with this specific point. The problem that Bohi keeps crashing into is that he’s assuming that we have the capacity, in theory, to have the same authority as Jesus in virtue of faith. For example, Bohi comments on the miracle story found in Mark 9, “Jesus didn’t pray at that moment for the father’s boy to be healed. His bank account of faith was already full because He lived a lifestyle of prayer. Power and authority are based on what has happened in us before we get to the moment of crisis.” (page 262-263) Jesus was in constant prayer with the Father, yes. However, Jesus acted on His own authority to heal the boy. We haven’t been given that authority to heal in the way Jesus did and the way His apostles did. Bohi says that Jesus was able to heal the child because “His bank account of faith was already full”, which is why he didn’t need to pray at the moment. This is the type of absurdity that naturally results when we equate ourselves to Jesus.

    6) Bohi believes in healing “because of the atonement” (page 263). Bohi makes some dicey claims about how the nature of the atonement and healing are linked. Bohi says, “Sickness and disease are the results of sin that entered our world, but if you remove all sin from our lives through the atoning power of Jesus, then there is no room for sickness to remain in our lives either” (page 265 – 266). This statement implies that if you’re sick, the atoning power of Jesus didn’t extend to you. Bohi doesn’t seem to realize that the atonement is true in the final eternal sense, but doesn’t necessarily extend to the physical conditions of our earthly bodies. To assume otherwise creates an unbiblical environment where Christians question their salvation every time they sneeze. 

    7) Bohi believes in healing “because I have never been to a place where I didn’t see someone healed” (page 266). Bohi continues, “I’ve been brainwashed into believing this because I’ve seen so much. I just keep seeing miracles everywhere I go. I have seen tumors shrink, cancer cleansed, paralyzed limbs move, people get out of wheelchairs, and deaf ears opened” (page 266 — emphasis mine). Bohi says, “I’ve even seen people raised from the dead.” McCorkle commented in the conclusion of the chapter, “I believe that we have been commissioned to heal the sick as Jesus did. I believe that we have the same power in us as Jesus possessed” (page 269 — emphasis mine). 

    These are radical claims about healing, resurrection, and extremely fringe unorthodox views that equate us with God Himself. Bohi recalls the resurrections of two babies in his book on pages 110 and 111. 

    “I was in Hilliard, Ohio, and I laid hands on a young woman who was really longing for a breakthrough in her life. When the spirit of God came on her, she couldn’t even walk back to her seat. She and her husband called me two days later and told me that the hair on her arms and legs stood up from the moment God came upon her. It was like an electric current going through her. Four days after this manifestation of the Holy Spirit, she went to the doctors for a scheduled D & C because her fetus had died. However the baby was alive, and they canceled the procedure. The doctors have no explanation for how the fetus came back to life.”

    “I remember when I was praying for people in Idaho, and many people were falling under the power of the Spirit. It was during this meeting that another lady, who had fallen out in the Spirit, testified that her dead fetus came back to life.” 

    Here is a video of Bohi talking about how he brought three dead people back to life.

    In addition to these five resurrections, Bohi spoke to Presence Worship on April 5, 2021, and said, “In my ministry, in 12 years, I think we’ve had about 77,000 healings.” (clip here)

    On May 15, 2022 (a little over a year after the above video), Bohi spoke at Lebanon House of Prayer and said he stopped keeping track of healing testimonies “three years and nine months ago,” but the number of healings somehow increased to “over” 82,000 since the first video. (clip here)

    If Bohi resigned his ministry from documenting faith healings starting in January 2019, which is considerably earlier than the first clip, why didn’t Bohi mention this fact in his first clip? Why did the number increase from the first clip (April 2021) to the second clip (May 2022) if his ministry no longer documented the number of healings? Why should anyone believe Bohi given his demonstratable dishonesty about his claims concerning his faith ministry?

    However, for the sake of argument, let’s assume that everything Bohi said is 100% true. This would mean that five dead people are now alive among us. In an age of new media, where virtually nothing happens without detection, how have these five formerly dead people not caught anyone’s attention? Supernatural events in history leave a massive fingerprint. If God used Bohi to resurrect one person, let alone five people, the news about the resurrection would boil over the surface, and news of the miracle would spread far and wide. Not only would Bohi be known locally for his involvement in the resurrection, but the news would spread nationally and potentially internationally. Now, let’s assume that this happened five times. If Bohi was involved in five confirmed resurrections, God’s glory couldn’t be contained and it would give Bohi a perfect opportunity to exalt God and spread the Gospel. 

    Let’s forget about the resurrections momentarily and focus on Bohi’s 2021 statement in the video above, “In my ministry, in 12 years, I think we’ve had about 77,000 healings.” Mathematically speaking, that is 17.5 miraculous healings a day. With this many healings over 12 years, there would be crowds of people chasing him down! Why wouldn’t he volunteer at a hospital to bring healing if God granted him the gift of healing? How come the world isn’t familiar with Bohi’s divine healing ministry that has touched 77,000 people? God should be glorified by these healings, and these healings can be used as a tool to bring people to Christ. Yet, as great as these stories sound, something doesn’t feel quite right.

    I couch the rest of the article by saying that I generally believe in continuationism. I say this because I anticipate the onslaught of criticisms from people assuming that I’m a rabid cessationist. I don’t believe that the ‘signs’ have ceased with the original apostolic age. There is plenty of reasons to believe that ‘signs’ outlasted the original apostolic age. I am open to the possibility that God used Bohi to perform miracles of healing. I also believe in the Biblical characteristic of discernment. If we’re informed in the scriptures, we can soundly identify a tree by its fruit (Luke 6:43-45). Sadly, Bohi’s tree isn’t producing a healthy harvest.

    The high number of healings and resurrections lacks the accompanying evidence one would expect to see if these claims were true. The sheer volume of healings would’ve easily caught the attention of a medical journal over the span of 12 years. The five resurrections would be publicized in American media ad infinitum. Yet, nobody has heard of these events outside of Bohi personally telling people in very imprecise terms with very few details. 

    Conclusion

    Respected biblical scholar Wayne Grudem, also a continuationist, has a very balanced theological outlook on healing. He writes in Systematic Theology 2nd Edition, “In each individual case it is God’s sovereign wisdom that decides the outcome, and our role is simply to ask him and wait for him to answer (whether “yes” or “no” or “keep praying and wait”)” (page 1319). Grudem doesn’t argue that if we simply had the faith of Jesus, we’d have Jesus’ identical authority as Bohi argues. 

    While I agree with Bohi that healing exists in the modern world, I strongly disagree with his theology on this subject matter. His seven reasons lack any serious degree of biblical understanding, insight, wisdom, and discernment. Sadly, it’s embarrassing that any pastor would invite Bohi into their church for healing or revival services with this information publicly available

    Let us pray for Dan Bohi. He’s in desperate need of biblical understanding. I urgently warn churches that are considering having Bohi lead a revival or healing service to reconsider. These church leaders must protect their flock from false teachers. This article easily demonstrates that Bohi meets the criteria of a false teacher because his theology distorts the Word of God and his claims of the miraculous are inflated, unsubstantiated, and misleading. 

  • Dan Bohi and Healing

    Dan Bohi and Healing

    Continuing with this series on NAR evangelist Dan Bohi, I’ll provide a comprehensive review of Bohi’s healing theology and provide an assessment of the claims he’s made about his healing ministry. I’ll directly cite Bohi’s book titled Holiness and Healing along with videos of him speaking about his healings. I’ve taken great efforts to cite Bohi in his own words by carefully studying his book and watching his online material. I’ve provided page numbers for every quote so anyone willing can easily access the material I’m citing. As I mentioned in my introduction, my goal is to hold Bohi proportionately accountable for his theology in a way that is commensurate to his tenure in the faith and his role within the church as a professional evangelist. Now, let’s examine Dan’s theology of healing.

    Bohi’s Healing Theology

    Bohi and his like-minded companion Rob McCorkle are theologically identical in every way as far as I can tell from reading their book, Holiness and Healing. This is especially true as it relates to the topic of faith healing. While I will be speaking specifically about Bohi in this article, everything that applies to Bohi equally applies to McCorkle within the context of this article. 

    Bohi gives seven reasons why he believes that God still heals today. Let’s work our way down Bohi’s list and test whether his reasons stand the test of Biblically scrutiny. 

    1) Bohi believes in healing because “it is God’s will to heal” (page 235). Does God always will everyone to be healed in this life? No. That’s an obvious and indisputable fact. If God willed everyone to be healed, there would be no illness. Bohi’s position is that it’s always God’s will to heal because “originally and eternally God’s will was, and will be, for wholeness and healing” (page 235). Bohi cites Matthew 6:10 to demonstrate that Jesus corroborates his view when He says, “Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” According to Bohi, if it’s always God’s will to heal and the kingdom of God is free of illness, healing is possible if we are capable of manifesting “the kingdom of God in this present age” (page 240). McCorkle affirms Bohi’s statement by saying, “If He manifested the kingdom of God in this present age, then our commission is the same” (page 241).

    Looking at Bohi’s words closely, he assumes that God’s will is to physically heal everyone on earth because he’s using Matthew 6:10 as a prooftext to conclude that since there is no illness in the kingdom, therefore God’s sovereign will wouldn’t include the allowance of illness on earth. Bohi theorizes that since Jesus manifested the kingdom of God in the present age, we’re Biblically called to manifest the kingdom of God in an identical way. The ESV Study Bible provides some excellent insights on Matthew 6:10 that clear up Bohi’s confusion,

    “Christians are called to pray and work for the continual advance of God’s kingdom on earth. The presence of God’s kingdom in this age refers to the reign of Christ in the hearts and lives of believers, and to the reigning presence of Christ in his body, the church – so that they increasingly reflect his love, obey his laws, honor him, do good for all people, and proclaim the good news of the kingdom. The third petition speaks of God’s will. This means God’s “revealed will”, which involves conduct that is pleasing to him as revealed in scripture. Just as God’s will is perfectly experienced in heaven, Jesus prays that it will be experienced on earthThe will of God will be expressed in its fullness only when God’s kingdom comes in its final form, when Christ returns in power and great glory (see Matt. 24:30; cf. Rom. 8:18-25; Rev. 20:1-10), but it will increasingly be seen in this age as well (Matt. 13:31-33).” (pages 1831 – 1832 — emphasis mine)

    While we may see more of God’s kingdom manifested on earth increasingly over time, we’ll never fully see God’s kingdom in its final form until Christ returns. While there is nothing unbiblical about praying for healing, we must never assume that God’s will includes healing in every circumstance. This is not the case and nor is it Biblically supported by the scriptures.

    2) Bohi believes in healing because “Jesus demonstrated it” (page 243). Jesus did demonstrate healing, however, does this mean that we have the same healing model in the modern world? There is no reason to believe that’s true. Simply because Jesus did something doesn’t mean we can do it too. This is an assumption without any biblical prooftext.

    Bohi states, “If 40 percent of the gospels are about the miracles of Jesus then I think that they are important, and we should be wondering how, why, and what happened to us if we’re not duplicating what Jesus did. The question is: are we really Christlike disciples?” (page 244 – emphasis mine) He continues by saying, “In John 14:12, Jesus said that if anyone believed in Him, and that is present tense faith (meaning that if we are believing Him), then they would do what he did. So if we are intimate enough with Jesus and lean into Him with faith, then we will do what he did and even greater. That means “anyone” who believes in Him.” (page 244) 

    Referring back to the ESV Study Bible again for clarification on John 14:12,

    the works that I do. In John’s Gospel, the term “works” (Gk. ergon), both in singular and in plural, is a broader term than “signs.” While “signs” in John are characteristically miracles that attest to Jesus’ identity as Messiah and the Son of God, and that lead unbelievers to faith, Jesus’ “works” include both his miracles and his other activities and teachings, including the whole of his ministry. These are all manifestations of the activity of God the Father, for Jesus said, “The Father dwells in me does his works” (14:10). Here Jesus is teaching his disciples to imitate the things he did in his life and ministry. The disciples’ greater works will be possible because Jesus is going to the Father, subsequent to his finished work on the cross; this indicates that the “greater works” will be possible because of the power of the Holy Spirit who would be sent after Jesus goes to the Father. The expression “greater works” could be translated broadly as “greater things,” since the Greek meizona is simply a neuter adjective and the noun “works” (Gk. erga, plural) is not included here as it is in the earlier part of the verse. These “greater works” include evangelism, teaching, and deeds of mercy and compassion – in short, the entire ministry of the church to the entire world, beginning at Pentecost (E.g., on the day of Pentecost alone, more believers were added to Jesus’ followers than during his entire earthly ministry up to that time; cf. Acts 2:41.) These works are “greater” not because they are more amazing miracles but because they will be greater in their worldwide scope and will result in the transformation of individual lives and of whole cultures and societies” (pages 2052 – 2053 — emphasis mine)

    In light of the proper context, Bohi’s glamorized view of us being functionally equivalent to Jesus is farcical at best and arguably heretical at worst. Bohi pays no attention to the fact that there were individuals within the early church in the presence of apostles who remained ill. Paul describes in 2 Corinthians 4:16 that “Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day” demonstrating that their physical bodies were failing. This wouldn’t have been mentioned if they were physically healed. Similarly, Paul writes to Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:23 and says, “No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.” Again, Timothy wasn’t healed miraculously but was being encouraged to treat his ailments medicinally. Lastly, Paul wrote to Timothy again in 2 Timothy 4:20 and said, “Erastus remained at Corinth, and I left Trophimus, who was ill, at Miletus.” The ESV Study Bible states, “Even Paul, with his apostolic gifts (cf. Acts 19:11-12; 2 Cor. 12:12) was not always empowered to heal. Christians today should pray earnestly for physical healing, but God is still sovereign in whether he grants healing in each specific case.” (page 2343 — emphasis mine). Would Bohi suggest that the Apostle Paul misunderstood Christ’s healing model?

    3) Bohi believes in healing because of “the kingdom” (page 249). He repeats many of the same points found in his first point concerning bringing God’s kingdom down to earth. Bohi states, “In Matthew 10, Jesus commissioned us to preach, teach, and do ministry. He was saying: I’m going to give you all the authority that I have because I can’t do this by myself. I can’t cover the world without helpers” (page 249 – emphasis mine). For a matter of clarity, I’m going to cite what Bohi’s referencing in Matthew 10:1,

    And he called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction.” (ESV)

    Bohi made a common exegetical error of substituting a description with a prescription. In Matthew 10, Jesus gave them, the twelve apostles, authority over “unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction.” There isn’t a scripture in Matthew 10 that prescribes authority to us in this way.

    4) Bohi believes in healing “because of authority” (page 252). Bohi believes that we have the same authority as Jesus, so we should always expect Jesus-like healings. Bohi states, “There are three times in the gospels where we are told that a student is never above His teacher, but when we are fully trained, we will be exactly like Him. Jesus said that!” (page 257 — emphasis mine) He makes this comment without reference to any scriptures to substantiate his Biblical assertion that “fully trained” students can become “exactly like Jesus.” Bohi opines about why people don’t “operate with this divine authority that Jesus has given to us.” His ironic response is that “people in the church don’t use the authority that they have because they are biblically illiterate.” (page 257 — emphasis mine) 

    Bohi provides a lot of insight into what he thinks are Biblical messages about how we have the authority to heal, but he is guilty of the very thing he accuses people of being. He’s biblically illiterate. Again, he takes historical descriptions of the apostles who were given authority to heal and imports that same authority upon us without providing any prooftexts for how his claim can be biblically reconciled. 

    5) Bohi believes in healing “because of faith” (page 259). Bohi states that prayer will only function among the faithful. Indeed, there is Biblical support for having faith. This is a virtue and I don’t trivialize the point that Bohi is making with this specific point. The problem that Bohi keeps crashing into is that he’s assuming that we have the capacity, in theory, to have the same authority as Jesus in virtue of faith. For example, Bohi comments on the miracle story found in Mark 9, “Jesus didn’t pray at that moment for the father’s boy to be healed. His bank account of faith was already full because He lived a lifestyle of prayer. Power and authority are based on what has happened in us before we get to the moment of crisis.” (page 262-263) Jesus was in constant prayer with the Father, yes. However, Jesus acted on His own authority to heal the boy. We haven’t been given that authority to heal in the way Jesus did and the way His apostles did. Bohi says that Jesus was able to heal the child because “His bank account of faith was already full”, which is why he didn’t need to pray at the moment. This is the type of absurdity that naturally results when we equate ourselves to Jesus.

    6) Bohi believes in healing “because of the atonement” (page 263). Bohi makes some dicey claims about how the nature of the atonement and healing are linked. Bohi says, “Sickness and disease are the results of sin that entered our world, but if you remove all sin from our lives through the atoning power of Jesus, then there is no room for sickness to remain in our lives either” (page 265 – 266). This statement implies that if you’re sick, the atoning power of Jesus didn’t extend to you. Bohi doesn’t seem to realize that the atonement is true in the final eternal sense, but doesn’t necessarily extend to the physical conditions of our earthly bodies. To assume otherwise creates an unbiblical environment where Christians question their salvation every time they sneeze. 

    7) Bohi believes in healing “because I have never been to a place where I didn’t see someone healed” (page 266). Bohi continues, “I’ve been brainwashed into believing this because I’ve seen so much. I just keep seeing miracles everywhere I go. I have seen tumors shrink, cancer cleansed, paralyzed limbs move, people get out of wheelchairs, and deaf ears opened” (page 266 — emphasis mine). Bohi says, “I’ve even seen people raised from the dead.” McCorkle commented in the conclusion of the chapter, “I believe that we have been commissioned to heal the sick as Jesus did. I believe that we have the same power in us as Jesus possessed” (page 269 — emphasis mine). 

    These are radical claims about healing, resurrection, and extremely fringe unorthodox views that equate us with God Himself. Bohi recalls the resurrections of two babies in his book on pages 110 and 111. 

    “I was in Hilliard, Ohio, and I laid hands on a young woman who was really longing for a breakthrough in her life. When the spirit of God came on her, she couldn’t even walk back to her seat. She and her husband called me two days later and told me that the hair on her arms and legs stood up from the moment God came upon her. It was like an electric current going through her. Four days after this manifestation of the Holy Spirit, she went to the doctors for a scheduled D & C because her fetus had died. However the baby was alive, and they canceled the procedure. The doctors have no explanation for how the fetus came back to life.”

    “I remember when I was praying for people in Idaho, and many people were falling under the power of the Spirit. It was during this meeting that another lady, who had fallen out in the Spirit, testified that her dead fetus came back to life.” 

    Here is a video of Bohi talking about how he brought three dead people back to life.

    In addition to these five resurrections, Bohi spoke to Presence Worship on April 5, 2021, and said, “In my ministry, in 12 years, I think we’ve had about 77,000 healings.” (clip here)

    On May 15, 2022 (a little over a year after the above video), Bohi spoke at Lebanon House of Prayer and said he stopped keeping track of healing testimonies “three years and nine months ago,” but the number of healings somehow increased to “over” 82,000 since the first video. (clip here)

    If Bohi resigned his ministry from documenting faith healings starting in January 2019, which is considerably earlier than the first clip, why didn’t Bohi mention this fact in his first clip? Why did the number increase from the first clip (April 2021) to the second clip (May 2022) if his ministry no longer documented the number of healings? Why should anyone believe Bohi given his demonstratable dishonesty about his claims concerning his faith ministry?

    However, for the sake of argument, let’s assume that everything Bohi said is 100% true. This would mean that five dead people are now alive among us. In an age of new media, where virtually nothing happens without detection, how have these five formerly dead people not caught anyone’s attention? Supernatural events in history leave a massive fingerprint. If God used Bohi to resurrect one person, let alone five people, the news about the resurrection would boil over the surface, and news of the miracle would spread far and wide. Not only would Bohi be known locally for his involvement in the resurrection, but the news would spread nationally and potentially internationally. Now, let’s assume that this happened five times. If Bohi was involved in five confirmed resurrections, God’s glory couldn’t be contained and it would give Bohi a perfect opportunity to exalt God and spread the Gospel. 

    Let’s forget about the resurrections momentarily and focus on Bohi’s 2021 statement in the video above, “In my ministry, in 12 years, I think we’ve had about 77,000 healings.” Mathematically speaking, that is 17.5 miraculous healings a day. With this many healings over 12 years, there would be crowds of people chasing him down! Why wouldn’t he volunteer at a hospital to bring healing if God granted him the gift of healing? How come the world isn’t familiar with Bohi’s divine healing ministry that has touched 77,000 people? God should be glorified by these healings, and these healings can be used as a tool to bring people to Christ. Yet, as great as these stories sound, something doesn’t feel quite right.

    I couch the rest of the article by saying that I generally believe in continuationism. I say this because I anticipate the onslaught of criticisms from people assuming that I’m a rabid cessationist. I don’t believe that the ‘signs’ have ceased with the original apostolic age. There is plenty of reasons to believe that ‘signs’ outlasted the original apostolic age. I am open to the possibility that God used Bohi to perform miracles of healing. I also believe in the Biblical characteristic of discernment. If we’re informed in the scriptures, we can soundly identify a tree by its fruit (Luke 6:43-45). Sadly, Bohi’s tree isn’t producing a healthy harvest.

    The high number of healings and resurrections lacks the accompanying evidence one would expect to see if these claims were true. The sheer volume of healings would’ve easily caught the attention of a medical journal over the span of 12 years. The five resurrections would be publicized in American media ad infinitum. Yet, nobody has heard of these events outside of Bohi personally telling people in very imprecise terms with very few details. 

    Conclusion

    Respected biblical scholar Wayne Grudem, also a continuationist, has a very balanced theological outlook on healing. He writes in Systematic Theology 2nd Edition, “In each individual case it is God’s sovereign wisdom that decides the outcome, and our role is simply to ask him and wait for him to answer (whether “yes” or “no” or “keep praying and wait”)” (page 1319). Grudem doesn’t argue that if we simply had the faith of Jesus, we’d have Jesus’ identical authority as Bohi argues. 

    While I agree with Bohi that healing exists in the modern world, I strongly disagree with his theology on this subject matter. His seven reasons lack any serious degree of biblical understanding, insight, wisdom, and discernment. Sadly, it’s embarrassing that any pastor would invite Bohi into their church for healing or revival services with this information publicly available

    Let us pray for Dan Bohi. He’s in desperate need of biblical understanding. I urgently warn churches that are considering having Bohi lead a revival or healing service to reconsider. These church leaders must protect their flock from false teachers. This article easily demonstrates that Bohi meets the criteria of a false teacher because his theology distorts the Word of God and his claims of the miraculous are inflated, unsubstantiated, and misleading. 

  • Dan Bohi and the NAR

    Dan Bohi and the NAR

    Pastor Voddie Baucham once preached, “When you introduce ideas that sound very similar to it (i.e. Christianity) and put Jesus’ name to it, what you get is a brand of Christianity that is not at all Christian.” The New Apostolic Reformation movement (read my writings about the NAR here) does precisely that. NAR evangelist Dan Bohi’s written work, Holiness and Healing, co-authored by NAR Nazarene pastor Rob McCorkle, openly promote NAR theology. I will examine Bohi’s theological commitments and how they align with the NAR movement. My citations will come directly from his book. For those who wish to dive more deeply, I will encourage all my visitors to read my fuller treatment of the NAR’s scriptural claims in a separate article.

    Apostles and Prophets

    Bohi believes the office of apostles and prophets exists in the modern world. This statement can be confusing because the terminology is familiar to us. Similar to how Mormons have perverted Christian terminology, the NAR has monkeyed around with Christian terms. Apostles exist when defined Biblically. For example, if an apostle is defined as a ‘missionary’ or ‘church planter’, there is no Biblical inconsistency. However, when the NAR defines an apostle as being someone appointed by God to govern the church because of their privileged ability to receive direct revelation from God, this is a dramatic departure from scripture. 

    Bohi openly embraces the NAR definition of an apostle by stating, 

    “I believe apostles govern. They hear what is going on in the heavenly realm because God has given them a special calling to see from the perspective of Heaven. They have the responsibility of oversight. They give messages that give guidance and oversight for movements. They have the anointing to bring corporate shifts because they operate from the perspective of the heavenly realm, and so they have great vision and insight as to where churches and movements need to go. We might think of apostles as spiritual fathers, too. They father/parent movements.” (page 159)

    The NAR’s definition of apostle is not scripturally rooted. This theological sleight of hand imports the authority of the Christ-appointed apostles of the early church to the functional apostles found in Ephesians 4:11, which would operate as missionaries and church planters. Theologian Wayne Grudem observes, “It is noteworthy that no major leaders in the history of the church – not Athanasius or Augustine, not Luther or Calvin, not Wesley or Whitefield – has taken to himself the title of ‘apostle’ or let himself be called an apostle.” (Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, page 911). Yet, those in the NAR celebrate and promote this misreading of scripture and practice. 

    Secondly, Bohi believes that prophets also hold a God-appointed authoritative office that operates similarly. The implications of NAR theology necessarily entail that the authority of modern prophets is equivalent to Old Testament prophets, which spoke directly for God. If that’s true of modern prophets, those who prophesy are inerrant because they’re speaking for God. Bohi writes about his views on modern prophets,

    “I believe prophets guide. They have the ability to see and hear prophetically, so they give words of guidance. Prophets have the ability to alert churches and movements of where the Spirit is leading. They can avert spiritual disaster, too. Sometimes their words bring correction or warning to movements. If the Church is operating with evangelists, pastors, and teachers but not prophets and apostles, then we are operating in a realm that keeps chasing itself around the earthly realm without the heavenly influence. This is why I believe God appointed them in the church first (see 1 Corinthians 12:28). They keep the church attached to the spiritual realm. They help funnel in supernatural activities.” (page 159-160)

    NAR apologists disproportionately prioritize supernatural activities and governmental offices over a sound understanding of scripture. When their prophecies fail, they commonly say that modern prophets can’t be expected to be correct 100% of the time. Bill Hamon, who is commonly considered the leading prophet in the NAR movement, states in his book, “prophets ministering in the dispensation of the Church are extended more grace than were the prophets of the Old Testament.” (page 101) Hamon writes in a separate book, “God has ordained that the apostles and prophets will receive the revelations, creative ideas, and divine strategy for bringing transformation to this world as God has ordained from the foundation of the world.” (page 247). It cannot be scripturally reconciled that prophets are divine agents of God’s knowledge while demanding allowances for error. Moses gave us criteria for how to discern the legitimacy of a prophet in Deuteronomy 18:22, “If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed.” Regardless of scripture, the NAR demands that prophets should sit in offices of church government with authority alongside apostles while admitting prophetic fallibility. Those that advance this teaching are promoting false doctrine.

    As you can see, Bohi is aligned with those in the NAR movement. Bohi goes further and says, “The job of the apostles and prophets is to help us become aware of the atmosphere of the kingdom, and if we don’t recognize them or acknowledge them, then supernatural activity isn’t as prevalent.” (page 160) By implication, Bohi’s view is that we cannot question those that claim to be apostles and prophets because it’ll severely limit our exposure to “supernatural activity.” Bohi’s obsession with supernatural activity is disturbing, especially when it comes at the expense of perverting the word of God and leading Christ followers astray.

    Conclusion

    When Dan Bohi, his co-author Rob McCorkle, or any individual who makes claims that reveal their NAR theology, they ultimately resort to imprecise language to cloak their agenda. There are many outlandish assertions made about the nature of apostles and prophets, among many other things, but their justification for their theology isn’t rooted in a contextual reading of the scriptures. As I’ve demonstrated here and elsewhere, the NAR movement is heterodoxical at best and heretical at worst. The NAR doesn’t belong in a healthy church. NAR is not a “brand of Christianity” that is Christian at all, and pastors who promote the NAR from the pulpit, tolerate it from their congregations, or invite Dan Bohi (or any NAR evangelist) to their church will answer to God for their transgressions

  • Dan Bohi and the NAR

    Dan Bohi and the NAR

    Pastor Voddie Baucham once preached, “When you introduce ideas that sound very similar to it (i.e. Christianity) and put Jesus’ name to it, what you get is a brand of Christianity that is not at all Christian.” The New Apostolic Reformation movement (read my writings about the NAR here) does precisely that. NAR evangelist Dan Bohi’s written work, Holiness and Healing, co-authored by NAR Nazarene pastor Rob McCorkle, openly promote NAR theology. I will examine Bohi’s theological commitments and how they align with the NAR movement. My citations will come directly from his book. For those who wish to dive more deeply, I will encourage all my visitors to read my fuller treatment of the NAR’s scriptural claims in a separate article.

    Apostles and Prophets

    Bohi believes the office of apostles and prophets exists in the modern world. This statement can be confusing because the terminology is familiar to us. Similar to how Mormons have perverted Christian terminology, the NAR has monkeyed around with Christian terms. Apostles exist when defined Biblically. For example, if an apostle is defined as a ‘missionary’ or ‘church planter’, there is no Biblical inconsistency. However, when the NAR defines an apostle as being someone appointed by God to govern the church because of their privileged ability to receive direct revelation from God, this is a dramatic departure from scripture. 

    Bohi openly embraces the NAR definition of an apostle by stating, 

    “I believe apostles govern. They hear what is going on in the heavenly realm because God has given them a special calling to see from the perspective of Heaven. They have the responsibility of oversight. They give messages that give guidance and oversight for movements. They have the anointing to bring corporate shifts because they operate from the perspective of the heavenly realm, and so they have great vision and insight as to where churches and movements need to go. We might think of apostles as spiritual fathers, too. They father/parent movements.” (page 159)

    The NAR’s definition of apostle is not scripturally rooted. This theological sleight of hand imports the authority of the Christ-appointed apostles of the early church to the functional apostles found in Ephesians 4:11, which would operate as missionaries and church planters. Theologian Wayne Grudem observes, “It is noteworthy that no major leaders in the history of the church – not Athanasius or Augustine, not Luther or Calvin, not Wesley or Whitefield – has taken to himself the title of ‘apostle’ or let himself be called an apostle.” (Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, page 911). Yet, those in the NAR celebrate and promote this misreading of scripture and practice. 

    Secondly, Bohi believes that prophets also hold a God-appointed authoritative office that operates similarly. The implications of NAR theology necessarily entail that the authority of modern prophets is equivalent to Old Testament prophets, which spoke directly for God. If that’s true of modern prophets, those who prophesy are inerrant because they’re speaking for God. Bohi writes about his views on modern prophets,

    “I believe prophets guide. They have the ability to see and hear prophetically, so they give words of guidance. Prophets have the ability to alert churches and movements of where the Spirit is leading. They can avert spiritual disaster, too. Sometimes their words bring correction or warning to movements. If the Church is operating with evangelists, pastors, and teachers but not prophets and apostles, then we are operating in a realm that keeps chasing itself around the earthly realm without the heavenly influence. This is why I believe God appointed them in the church first (see 1 Corinthians 12:28). They keep the church attached to the spiritual realm. They help funnel in supernatural activities.” (page 159-160)

    NAR apologists disproportionately prioritize supernatural activities and governmental offices over a sound understanding of scripture. When their prophecies fail, they commonly say that modern prophets can’t be expected to be correct 100% of the time. Bill Hamon, who is commonly considered the leading prophet in the NAR movement, states in his book, “prophets ministering in the dispensation of the Church are extended more grace than were the prophets of the Old Testament.” (page 101) Hamon writes in a separate book, “God has ordained that the apostles and prophets will receive the revelations, creative ideas, and divine strategy for bringing transformation to this world as God has ordained from the foundation of the world.” (page 247). It cannot be scripturally reconciled that prophets are divine agents of God’s knowledge while demanding allowances for error. Moses gave us criteria for how to discern the legitimacy of a prophet in Deuteronomy 18:22, “If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed.” Regardless of scripture, the NAR demands that prophets should sit in offices of church government with authority alongside apostles while admitting prophetic fallibility. Those that advance this teaching are promoting false doctrine.

    As you can see, Bohi is aligned with those in the NAR movement. Bohi goes further and says, “The job of the apostles and prophets is to help us become aware of the atmosphere of the kingdom, and if we don’t recognize them or acknowledge them, then supernatural activity isn’t as prevalent.” (page 160) By implication, Bohi’s view is that we cannot question those that claim to be apostles and prophets because it’ll severely limit our exposure to “supernatural activity.” Bohi’s obsession with supernatural activity is disturbing, especially when it comes at the expense of perverting the word of God and leading Christ followers astray.

    Conclusion

    When Dan Bohi, his co-author Rob McCorkle, or any individual who makes claims that reveal their NAR theology, they ultimately resort to imprecise language to cloak their agenda. There are many outlandish assertions made about the nature of apostles and prophets, among many other things, but their justification for their theology isn’t rooted in a contextual reading of the scriptures. As I’ve demonstrated here and elsewhere, the NAR movement is heterodoxical at best and heretical at worst. The NAR doesn’t belong in a healthy church. NAR is not a “brand of Christianity” that is Christian at all, and pastors who promote the NAR from the pulpit, tolerate it from their congregations, or invite Dan Bohi (or any NAR evangelist) to their church will answer to God for their transgressions