Beth Moore led a "commissioning" for 11,000 women (and men) at Unwrap the Bible conference

"The Commissioning."

It happened at the Women of Faith "Unwrap the Bible" Conference.

But first, some background.

This past February, just weeks ago, Beth Moore and four other women concluded the Unwrap The Bible event in Houston, and closed it with what the sponsor of the event, Women of Faith, called "A Commissioning". (??)

"Unwrap the Bible" was touted as America's largest bible conference, sponsored by "Women of Faith." (WOF) It was held for two days at Joel Osteen's Lakewood Church. In addition to five women who were to teach and preach their way through the weekend, WOF used clips from Catholic Mystic Roma Downey's "The Bible" series to punctuate the biblical "truths" the lineup of teachers was to teach. Downey also promoted the conference prior to its inception. Christine Caine, Beth Moore, Priscilla Shirer, Lisa Harper, and Sheila Walsh were the 5 scheduled bible teachers. Joel Osteen's wife Victoria opened the conference with a prayer. Lisa Bevere was on hand too. Eleven-thousand women attended. Here is a photo of Lakewood Church with Beth on the jumbotron-

Screen shot from WOF video

At the very end of the conference, Beth Moore did not offer a benediction for the women, she did not sing a song for them, she did something peculiar. Very peculiar. She held a "commissioning". At Moore's insistence, telling women to grab the person next to them, and repeat after her, Moore led the 11,000 women in a ceremony whose likeness I can't find anywhere in the bible.

At Moore's command, the 11,000 women dutifully paired up, hugged up, listened and then spoke in unison in call-and-response style with Moore leading them in this "commissioning." If you've never heard of a "commissioning" like this, I haven't either, because it doesn't exist. Moore has ripped the normal word from any biblical context and any known ceremony and has redefined it into something a seeker sensitive, New Age, pop psychology, comfy feminist would love. And love it they did.

Screen shot from WOF video
I am not making this up- the Women of Faith intended for the last segment of the conference to be called a "commissioning." Here is the WOF title card for the video segment:

Here is the Women of Faith web page explanation about it.

"Women of Faith Commissioning"
Monday, March 17, 2014 By Beth Moore
At last month’s Unwrap the Bible event in Houston, Beth Moore wrapped up the weekend with a “commissioning.” She gathered major points from all the speakers’ messages and had the women in the audience speak them over each other. We loved it and thought you would, too.
I'm sorry, but I don't love it. Not one word "spoken over the women" at the end of WOF Unwrap the Bible conference that Moore was "commissioning" was scripture. Not one. Many of the concepts in the ceremony were unbiblical, to boot.

How Moore introduced "the commissioning" to the women was:

"This is our way of sending you out with this truth embedded in the marrow of your bones."

Sounds painful.

It was then that Moore told the women to grab a women next to them and repeat what Moore said to the women they'd grabbed. She would say a line, the 11,000 women would repeat it to the partner they'd grabbed, whether they knew the woman or not, not knowing whether the woman was even saved or not. That's why there is a space for pauses after each phrase. Here is the transcript.
My dear Sister  Be confident this great day  That your God has chosen you  He can make a miracle  Out of your big mess  He can stand you up straight  And set your feet upon a rock  No matter where you’ve been  Or what you’ve done  You are not dirty  The power of the cross  Has made you clean  When you run out of what it takes  Girlfriend, run to Jesus  Let Jesus turn water into wine  Never forget  You have an enemy  Hell-bent on destroying you  But you have a Savior  Who became earthbound to deliver you  There is restoration and divine destiny for you  Throw your arms wide open and receive in Jesus’ Name  Rip off those expiration dates  God’s promise to you will be fulfilled  Quit just eavesdropping on God  Start leaning in and believing what He says  Impossible is where God starts!  Your God is faithful  He will do it  Do NOT retreat in fear  Now, girlfriend – get out there in that lost world  And show them what a woman looks like  When she unwraps her Bible 
And thus, these women have now been "commissioned." Did you notice the focus of the commissioning was on the women, and not the Lord? I did. In the bible, men are commissioned to go to the lost world and show Jesus to it by preaching His word. Beth Moore told 11,000 women to go to the lost world and show themselves to it.

But what exactly had happened at this commissioning? Was "the commissioning" at Unwrap the Bible an authoritative sacramental ceremony like baptism? Were they sacred vows like marriage? Was it an ordination ceremony? Unknown.

Was there a responsibility the women must now adopt because they'd uttered a creed and been "commissioned" by someone they consider a leader (and by some random women next to them)? It seemed so, because Moore said that she was "sending them out." Therefore was it a Missionary Commissioning ceremony, akin to when Timothy had been laid hands on and sent out? (1 Timothy 4:14). Unknown.

Picture Moses standing before 11,000 Israelite women, raising his staff, and telling them, "Start leaning in and believing what He says. Now, girlfriend – get out there in that lost world"


I submit to you that there are two problems with this WOF Commissioning event, and both represent an incremental slide down on the slippery slope of apostasy.

Discerners and watchmen are attuned to the incremental steps away from foundational truth. Most Christians with other gifts are busy employing their other gifts, and don't notice the slide until a great number of leaps have lurched us downward. But we notice each inch. This is one. So we warn.

The first issue is that while the SBC has been looking north, east, and south to protect doctrine against the inflow of homosexuality, transgenderism, and Calvinists, to the west, the feminists have crept in. I've mentioned before that Beth Moore is a neo-feminist. She has usurped the authority of her husband and her home and the church. She teaches and preaches in authority along with men. She is the President of a multi-million dollar corporation, while her husband is the Vice-President. She brought home the bacon while her kids were little, and her husband took care of them while she was frequently away. She says she was a stay-at-home mom, but she lived like a feminist.

Christine Caine is more forward. She plainly states that she believes women should have leadership roles. Caine and Moore, along with many others, are good examples of the curse of Genesis 3: her desire is for her husband and he shall rule over her. (Genesis 3:16) The struggle for women is to submit to Jesus in their God-given roles in life and most importantly, in the church. It has been an age-old struggle, and it has become a pitched battle in many false churches and also some Protestant denominations. These days, most have lost that battle and women have been ordained to serve in leadership roles formerly biblically reserved for men.

Well, the second problem that ties back into the first (ecclesiastical feminism) is that words mean things. They mean things. Any liberal in any realm in the battle for hearts and minds will first seek to change meanings of commonly understood words in order to co-opt the meaning and then to redefine them to their advantage. Example: sodomite---->homosexual---->gay. In the church world, we no longer sin. We make mistakes. We're no longer Christian. We're Christ followers.

As the writers said in an essay titled "Redefining Terms" said,
In the political world, terminology is no less important than in the world of the programmer.  However, there has been a systematic effort to obfuscate and confuse terminology in order to usurp hitherto positive meanings and put them in the service of ideals which, in many cases, are opposite to the word’s original meaning.  
Let's contrast Moore's commissioning above to a biblical one. Here is a commissioning service from the bible:
"So the LORD said to Moses, "Take Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him; and have him stand before Eleazar the priest and before all the congregation, and commission him in their sight. "You shall put some of your authority on him, in order that all the congregation of the sons of Israel may obey him." (Numbers 27:19-20)
Here is another reference to a commission, Paul reminding Timothy of his commissioning ceremony: 
Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophecy when the council of elders laid their hands on you. (1 Timothy 1:14)
Or this, when the church chose their first deacons:
And what they said pleased the whole gathering, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. These they set before the apostles, and they prayed and laid their hands on them. (Acts 6:5-6)
Commissioning means something. It's serious. Someone in authority gives authority to the ones who have been selected for a particular service, their qualification is affirmed by the whole church, and they are ordained in the work through a ceremony. Ordination means something too. GotQuestions explains a commissioning, this recognition of a man set apart for pastoral ministry, deacon service, or missionary work,
When God calls and qualifies a man for the ministry, it will be apparent both to that man and to the rest of the church. The would-be minister will meet the qualifications set forth in 1 Timothy 3:1-16 and Titus 1:5-9, and he will possess a consuming desire to preach (1 Corinthians 9:16). It is the duty of the church elders, together with the congregation, to recognize and accept the calling. After that, a formal commissioning ceremony—an ordination service—is appropriate, though by no means mandatory. The ordination ceremony itself does not confer any special power; it simply gives public recognition to God’s choice of leadership.
Christian feminists have seen that to redefine ordination into a commissioning is one way to get women into leadership. Moore publicly recognized all those women in a commissioning in a worship service and accompanied the recognition by a spoken creed.

Many denominations have been muddying the two words, most notably when Tim Keller of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York commissioned ordained a female deacon in his church service in 2009. This sparked a heated discussion of commissioning vs. ordination. Here are but two examples-

Tim Keller: The Case for Commissioning (Not Ordaining) Deaconesses
Tim Keller and Confusion Over "Commissioning" (Not Ordaining) Deaconesses

Ordain or commission, either way it is a method for women to adopt leadership roles they were not given by God. But redefining the term away from ordain into commission helps soften the blow.

Here's where the two issues, redefining terms and Christian feminism intersect with Beth Moore and the conference commissioning.

A scan on Wikipedia of the list of women ordained in this century, shows The Lutheran Protestant Church started to ordain women as priests in 1947. In 1972 America's first female rabbi was ordained by a rabbinical seminary. The next year, a Mennonite church in Illinois followed, ordaining a female pastor. A branch-off of the Latter Day Saints ordained a women in the late 1990s. Methodists ordain women. Seventh Day Adventists, Episcopalians, and Congregationalists have all been accepting of women in leadership roles. The Association of Catholic Priests in Ireland stated this year that the Catholic church must ordain women and allow priests to marry in order to survive. Whether false churches or true denominations, every flavor of the spectrum have fallen to the notion that women can and should be ordained to serve in leadership roles in the church. Except the Southern Baptist Convention.

In 2000 The Baptist Faith and Message was amended to state, “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.”

So far the SBC has been practically the only denomination of any kind, in any true religion or false, to withstand the onslaught of feminism that hearkens back to Genesis 3 and do not ordain women as pastors or deacons and rarely commission a woman alone for missionary work. Or have they? Does what they say match up with what they do? No.

Beth more preaches in pulpits substituting for men or alongside men, in authority during worship services. Here is Beth Moore with three ordained pastors, leading worship, her bible in hand.
Moore leading worship at the pulpit during Passion Conference 2012.
Screen shot Youtube. L-R, Moore, & actual ordained pastors, Chan, Giglio, Piper
Chan is a graduate of John MacArthur's Master's Seminary, a biblically solid seminary. Giglio is a graduate of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and spoke at the Southern Baptist Convention's 2011 Pastors Conference. Piper is a Reformed Baptist. All of them have been through training and serve in conservative churches and should know unequivocally that a woman cannot be a pastor, nor serve as a deacon, nor teach in authority over men during worship service. Yet there they are.

The SBC has not rebuked Moore for usurping authority in violation of the bible and their own declared creed. People, it's always important to see if what they say and what they do match up.

The authors of the Redefining Terms essay said of changing word definitions in the political world,
This is not an academic exercise in semantics. This is about truth, and about a threat as real as any terrorist attack and more immediate because it is covert.
It is exactly the same in the church world. Beth Moore's 'Commissioning' at the end of Unwrap the Bible was not a small thing. She endowed women with a commission, and sent them out. The very act of leading a commissioning ceremony imbues Moore with a tacit authority to do such a thing in the first place. But from where does she receive her authority to commission men and women in the first place? (and yes, there were men in the audience). There was not a pastor with her on the stage. Just Moore, giving a responsibility to 11,000 women, co-opting a term that the rest of the church has understood for millennia, and trivializing it. Trivialize how, you ask?

First, because all commissioning ceremonies in the bible and in solidly doctrinal churches in the centuries since, depend on the Holy Spirit's selection of individuals for the particular kind of service to Jesus (pastoral, deacon, or missionary). That's what commissioning services are, a public recognition. The entire congregation recognizes it, and participates in prayer and/or laying on of hands. The men selected for whatever service they are commissioned for (pastor, deacon, missionary), are uniformly recognized as saved, Holy Spirit-selected, and qualified.

Yet Moore told 11,000 women and men to willy-nilly speak words to the person next to them that they might not even know, such as this- "Be confident this great day  That your God has chosen you". How utterly foolish to say to an unknown, random person that they can be sure God has chosen them! Moore urged women to say "Throw your arms wide open and receive in Jesus’ Name". Jesus is not a genie and His name is not magic! And receive what, exactly? If they are saved they have already received, if they are not saved, they need to repent first!

And what if I don't throw my arms open, will I still "receive"? What if the lady next to me I'm parroting this to is not saved? Will she "receive"? And how completely meaningless to say "Rip off those expiration dates Quit just eavesdropping on God"

From the majesty of the commissioning of Numbers 27, to the beauty and authority of this commissioning from Moses to Joshua,
"Then Moses summoned Joshua and said to him in the presence of all Israel, "Be strong and courageous, for you must go with this people into the land that the LORD swore to their ancestors to give them, and you must divide it among them as their inheritance." (Deuteronomy 31:7)
We have Moore who has NO authority telling a bunch of women that they're chosen by God to quit eavesdropping and not be dirty and to then she sent them out and...what. To do what? The commissioning was absent any notion of service. But it was filled with self-esteem. So these women left the conference feeling like they've been given some authority to do something. They've been sent- to show themselves.

It's just trivial and sinful and ugly. The entire Commissioning was a terrible display of what happens when a woman like Moore who has thoroughly usurped authority at home and has been allowed by her denomination to usurp church authority for 20 years. This commissioning fad will infiltrate the SBC and before you know it undiscerning local Baptist churches will be "commissioning" women into leadership roles. Soon after that, they'll be ordaining them. You'll see.

May the Lord return before too many more undiscerning women fall into Moore's snare, and before too many good churches slide one more incremental step away from healthy doctrine into the pit of feminism. The Baptist churches have been so busy holding back the tide of homosexuality they forgot to look out for their wives, and sure enough, their desire is for their husbands and the struggle for power has at long last come to the last bastion of conservative church polity.

It's my job to tell you, and now I have.


For Further Reading:

Christian feminists like Beth Moore are redefining biblical womanhood


  1. Hi Elizabeth,

    That "commissioning" ceremony - it's just too weird for words. Frankly a little creepy, to boot. I wouldn't want anyone to speak those words to me, half of them were gibberish anyhow. Thanks for standing fast in opposition to Moore. She's "gone crackers", as the Brits say.

    Your comment: "The SBC has not rebuked Moore for usurping authority in violation of the bible and their own declared creed. People, it's always important to see if what they say and what they do match up."

    That is exactly why the SBC's new resolution to reject the heaven tourism books didn't impress me. They already aren't rebuking a woman for violating Scripture and their own creeds. So until they take actual action on these issues, it's just talk.


    1. Thanks Carolyn. When Moore began teaching through her own visions and revelation apart from the bible I thought it would be extremely clear that she is well past apostate. However, it is not clear to so many. I'm glad it is for you :)

  2. Elizabeth, thank you for continuing to sound the alarm! Sharing this.

  3. Here is Reva's comment:

    Okay, 3rd time I'm trying to post this (it hasn't been TAKING IT Elizabeth! Rather, it just deletes my entire comment... weird... and frustrating.....)

    Anyway, FTW, SBC (at least the liberal one we attended) ordained women for deacons long ago!! It nearly split the church, but the liberal preacher pushed for it & got his way. It's been that way for 20+ years. Their daughters have since gone to seminary to become "preachers".

    About this conference: at one time in my life I woulda' thought you were making too big a deal over it, but not anymore! As I have grown in Christ, I see the Bible's instructions (unto righteousness) are far different from what happens these days. Look at how BM is dressed on stage with the 3 men {who should know better doctrinally!!}.... and compare to 1 Timothy 2:9!! "Modest" apparel? I hardly think so.

    Plus I would not want some lady standing next to me slobbering all over me with "sweet, swelling words" ~ and I'm not anxious to have some stranger (what if she had a demon?) to lay hands on me. That's not being stiff-necked... that's actually in the Bible! Amen!

    1. Reva, here is your comment. Thank you for emailing it and for trying so hard to get it in! Your other comment under the essay "Jordan braces for Isis" went through! I am using a completely different template, a blogger internal template, so there really shouldn't be issues with sorry that you're frustrated! I don't know what else to do. I don't know why it took on the Jordan essay and not on the Beth Moore essay.

      GREAT point about "what of the woman next to you has a demon'. also liked reference to 2 Peter 2:18 phrase 'sweet swelling words'. Thanks again.

    2. Reva, FYI your comment showed up just now under SPAM.

    3. Good point I agree, about what if the woman next to you has a demon. I don't like people I don't know laying hands on me either. But I would appreciate understanding what you feel is wrong with how BM is dressed.


  4. Elizabeth, great post and thanks for using your gifts of discernment to help the wider body.
    I know exactly, from first hand experience, what you are describing in this crazy commissioning service. In may of 2012 I attended a Beth Moore conference in Boise, ID at the request of my mom. This was right before the Lord directed me into researching discernment and end time things. In fact, along with receiving the book "Jesus Calling" a few months before, I believe it was this event that propelled me into discovering my gifts of discernment.
    Anyhow, the entire time that I attended that conference, I was EXTREMELY uncomfortable. At the time, I didn't understand why. But I spent a lot of time going to the bathroom as an excuse to the group to get away from what was going on. At the end of the conference, Beth did one of these commission things and not only was I disturbed in my spirit, but I felt embarrassed. Extremely embarrassed. Suffice it to say, that after I began my studies and research, it became obviously clear to me why I had such an extreme reaction to that conference. I feel weird, even now, recalling it in my memory. Sadly, I know so many, including my mom and grandma, that are totally blinded to the truth about Beth.
    Also, I am not surprised in the least about Chan, Giglio and Piper standing by and letting Beth preach. Those are 3 names on my avoid list, as in their own ways they have already begun to slide....

    1. I agree with this post, I just wanted to add if I may, "Jesus Calling" is an extremely horrible book for anyone to be reading. The author claims everything she wrote was from her audibly speaking with the lord. that its extra-biblical revelation. The woman is a kook and unbiblical. She uses terms christians are use to but that universalism meanings. Its not of God.

  5. Hi Elizabeth.

    I continue to appreciate reading and thinking through what you post. I really do think over what you write for days at a time. I have come to this blog most everyday for several months now.
    I do not comment often, but you cause me to ask myself many questions and to research for the truth found in God's word. I truly respect the spirit from which you write.

    I have noticed that many who have "discernment" blogs, some times, run off of faulty knowledge of any particular conference or teaching. So, I must discern what I read and if I have attended the event, I know how things posted, at times, can be taken context.
    The credibility of the blogger in these situations are a huge thing for me.
    I also find that one blogger will take another blogger's info and spread it without looking in to the facts for themselves. Some bloggers read things into a situation that just is not factual. I am learning to discern the discerner.
    One blogger says one thing and another says the opposite, both may seem to have factual information to share. Some seem hateful and arrogant, always looking for some christian to say THE one thing they can blog about.
    There are some discernment bloggers saying John MacArthur is false because of Lordship salvation or because he is Calvinist or that he does not respect women.
    John MacArthur considers John Piper to be a brother, some have "discerned" him as false.
    It can be very confusing to follow discernment blogs.

    As far as the Passion Conference for unmarried 18-25 yr. olds, they desire to make room for that age group, so they try to keep spots open for students, but parents can join in as the "leader" for their kids and friends going, if they so desire. It is done frequently.
    Louie, (not Louis) Giglio, as the photo suggests.
    This photo posted also included the rap artist Lecrae.
    They were reading the full book of Ephesians. So, at least God's word was heard by all attending.

    I do not agree with the majority of Beth Moore's teaching. I did one of her studies years ago, but none after that.
    I do what I can to lead ladies other directions for learning the word, than the trending studies, her studies are about the only ones used in my church.
    I think she is now the "older lady" in trending Bible studies/speakers/conferences. I'm carefully reading what you post about Beth's teaching.
    Many younger ladies are now looking and joining the - If Gathering, Jen Hatmaker, and Ann Voskamp.

    As far as Beth usurping men's roles, the men are asking her to step up and teach. This causes me to ask, are the men sinning in such instances? Is she (or any woman) just doing what men in authority are asking them to do? I'm thinking this through more in a church leadership setting as well, asking a woman to read Scripture or pray.
    Kay Arthur is one who would teach and men would sit in on the conference or run media, etc., of their own volition.
    I just don't know how to make biblical sense of this in women's conferences or mixed conferences or Sunday chuch settings.
    Your thoughts are appreciated.

    Also, as far as women deacons, John MacArthur has women deacons.

    The commissioning ing this WOF video is just feeding the emotions of women to leave with a "high" and a "sense of purpose." One reason I do not fit in many women's situations. (sigh)
    Why is it, it seems most women thrive on this stuff?
    The feeling will be forgotten in less than a week and they will need a new "high" to make it through to the next conference.

    I did not intend for this to get so long, thanks for your patience.


    1. Hi Liz,

      Thanks for all your thoughtful comments. I agree, it is bewildering to read so many bloggers and listen to so many speakers who say they have the gift of discernment and yet so many disagree with each other.

      John MacArthur explained the anomaly that is John Piper. He used that word: anomaly. He hesitated to declare him not a brother, and I don't want to speak for him but I read between the lines in the discussion and it's clear that Piper's positions perplexed MacArthur and others. To me, perhaps it was equally clear that Piper is apostatizing but simply isn't far enough along yet to say it so.

      You're right, LeCrae was also on the stage but was too far to the left to make a sizable photo. I cropped it. The more men on stage who went along with a woman teaching over them the worse it is. Yes they were reading Ephesians but they were teaching Lectio Divina, a non-biblical approach to bible handling.

      I agree with your elder lady comment- I personally believe Moore is a prototype of the prophetess Jezebel spoken of in Rev 2. The church wrongfully tolerated the false prophetess for too long and she birthed spiritual daughters. If we follow the metaphor along, then I agree, Hatmaker, Rachel Held Evans, Voskamp, Caine and others would be the spawn of Moore, having followed in her example. The second generation of these prophetess daughters will be worse, because spiritual adultery and apostasy always gets worse, never better.

      John MacArthur uses male and female deacons but we have to define deacons He goes to great lengths in several of his web pages to explain it is the most simple of definitions: serving. At MacArthur's Grace Community Church Women are not decision making leaders as deacons are in many Baptist churches. I am almost positive women are not ordained. Here is his explanation

      "The Woman's Role in the Church

      1. Her limitations

      In 1 Timothy 2:11-14 Paul says, "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman, being deceived, was in the transgression." Women are not to teach men in church, and since elders are the teachers in the church, women are not allowed to be elders. Men and women have equal spiritual privileges, capacities, blessings, and promises, but their roles within the church differ. God has ordained the principles of authority and submission to function within the church just as He has within all society."

      I agree with you that if a man knows the bible and yet still asks a woman to teach in authority he is sinning. James 4:17, "So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin." Also, in Rev 2:20 Jesus said to the church at Thyatira,

      "Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet."

      Tolerating sin or failing to act against sin, is sin.

    2. Good morning, Elizabeth.

      Thank you for your response.
      I think I need some clarification on why you believe John Piper is apostatizing.
      I learned some time ago not to *always* come to a conclusion by "reading between the lines."
      When I heard Dr. MacArthur say, "anomaly" regarding JP, I heard it as his view on "being a cautious, but open" regarding sign gifts, that this held belief was an anomaly, off from his doctrinally sound beliefs. I also remember hearing Dr. M mention that maybe JP had some family member that kept him from being a full cessationist, so this is why he remained "open" to the sign gifts.
      Dr. M mentioned Piper is his friend and considers him a brother, at least that is what I heard, but I could be wrong.
      What is leading you to think/see JP is apostatizing?

      "Yes they were reading Ephesians but they were teaching Lectio Divina, a non-biblical approach to bible handling."

      I was at this conference. When they began reading Ephesians, I did not know about Lectio Divina. I was just thrilled that the book of Ephesians was being read, out loud, the full book of Ephesians!
      When the students were asked if they heard God speak, I assumed those leading on stage were asking the students that God speaks through His written word, did you hear Jesus? I do not remember if they were instructed to empty their minds and "listen to God" outside of Scripture. I know it went a bit mystical for me, but as I mentioned, I was not familiar with LD.
      After the conference I did do some research and read up on LD since this part of the conference was being labeled such a practice by discernment bloggers. (I found most just copied pics and texts from Apprising and some things for were taken out of context or made a bigger story in Apprising's article.)
      This part of the conference was for sure not a full out teaching of LD, but some aspects of it were included. (I am not trying to justify what went down or BM or the others, I'm sharing the context of my point of view during the conference.)
      Since the conference and looking at LD, I do agree that there was a hint of it during this time, it was not full out, but "listening to God" was an aspect of it.
      It is something that I warn others not to participate.
      I hope all of that makes sense.

      BM - what is the possibility that she will come around to see some of this stuff is silliness from the Word of Faith that she has let influence her? If she is still on this planet, isn't there time to turn from this, "God told me" visions /dreams and sloppy teaching stuff? Is it possible she is deceived and can grow out of this season of wrong thinking? (These are questions I ask myself.)


    3. My read between the lines comment was regarding the grace filled comment of MacArthur’s not to out and out discuss Piper’s various doctrinal stances against the mirror of apostasy, not to my own conclusion. My opinion is based on prayer, research and scripture.

      My comment is based on the following, as you had requested. The question, is, is John Piper apostatizing? I believe could well be, for some of the following reasons:

      Because of his participation with Moore at the pulpit in Lectio Divina

      Because of his participation in Lectio Divina, and his promotion of it on his website

      Because of his wishy-washiness in explaining about his participation in Lectio Divina, and the hesitant and confusing apology of it afterwards.

      Because of his relationship with Mark Driscoll and his refusal to correct him after Driscoll infamously abused the Song of Solomon in Driscoll’s Scotland sermons

      Because of his relationship with Rick Warren, i.e partnering with an extreme pragmatist, AND inviting him to the DG conference as a preacher

      Because of assuring his DG readers fervently that Rick Warren is deeply theological at root.

      Because of his refusal or inability to declare cessationism as biblical and is open to new revelation and is a continuationist. Phil Johnson wrote of Piper: “It is this facet of Dr. Piper's theology, I think, that makes his judgments often seem subjective—even arbitrary. Consider, for example, his fascination with "holy laughter" at the height of the Toronto Blessing—and his persistent reluctance to condemn that movement despite the vast damage it was causing. (Did he ever actually denounce the Toronto phenomenon? I didn't hear about it if he did.) That is just one example of what I would regard as a glaring lack of discernment in some of his judgments.”

      Teetering on important doctrines is the opposite of the clarity demanded by a preacher of the word and as an elder of the faith.

      Christian writer Sunny Shell wrote that to follow Piper takes more discernment that she has and more discernment than we as women are generally biblically given. I agree.

      I'll ponder your second question regarding Moore and repentance and reply momentarily

    4. Thanks for helping to clarify, Elizabeth.

      I have a few more questions...may I email a message to you?


    5. Sure Liz. The email address is on the right. I haven't forgotten about your 2nd question. I got involved in something yesterday and I promise to get to it today.

  6. 2 things!

    Elizabeth: “Sweet Gal”: I am not (constantly) frustrated! Would be a pretty warped individual if I was. Truly my timing stunk as I was trying to multi-task early in the morning, coffee in hand, needing to do other things…. Was even getting a lil’ paranoid, to tell the truth, as I know I once defended B.M. ~ so I’d wondered if you purposely blocked me from posting anything further regarding her! Ha! satan sets us up for all kinds of lies….. anyway, MOST TIMES I can post without any problem at all. I am no longer frustrated! Please do not frustrate yourself in trying to “repair” the site. It’s just fine and a real testimony. I know I always have to put armor on after posting! Each time I post, here comes another “let’s beat up on her” demon after me...seriously!

    Since what I wrote still did not show up even when you put it there, (go figure…??) I’ll try to write it one more time (failed to save it this a.m.) So best by memory: one thing I noticed was in the pic of BM on stage with the “conservative” men preachers (who should doctrinally know better!) ~ is her style of dress. Does it match up with 1 Timothy 2:9? Is it “modest”? I’d hardly think so!

    Also I admitted that at one time in my life I would have wondered if you were making too much of this, however since I’ve grown in Christ, I now notice these things myself & how her teachings do not line up with the Word.

    I would not want a lady standing next to me to slobber all over me with sweet, swelling words!! Nor would I want a stranger hugging or hanging onto me! What if she had a demon? The Bible says we are not to be hasty to allow others to “lay hands on us”!!

    And then to poster, Liz, what you wrote – about how the women surf on emotions and need another “high” the following week ~ wow!! Bang up job!!

    Reminded me SOOO much of: {read esp. verses 6 & 7!!}

    2 Timothy 3
    The Dangers of the Last Days
    1 You should know this, Timothy, that in the last days there will be very difficult times. 2 For people will love only themselves and their money. They will be boastful and proud, scoffing at God, disobedient to their parents, and ungrateful. They will consider nothing sacred. 3 They will be unloving and unforgiving; they will slander others and have no self-control. They will be cruel and hate what is good. 4 They will betray their friends, be reckless, be puffed up with pride, and love pleasure rather than God. 5 They will act religious, but they will reject the power that could make them godly. Stay away from people like that!
    6 They are the kind who work their way into people’s homes and win the confidence of[a] vulnerable women who are burdened with the guilt of sin and controlled by various desires. 7 (Such women are forever following new teachings, but they are never able to understand the truth.)

    And we are to what? STAY AWAY FROM people like this!!

    I honestly don’t know how to balance that out when it’s someone like your mother and/or grandmother pushing BM on you (such as you, Jennifer)….. that would be very difficult! Pray, pray, pray!!
    For me, it’s a friend who is so BM crazy. Another friend: it’s all about Joyce Meyer (who, she thinks, can do no wrong).

    I lovingly bring it up once, but if it ends up in a squabble, I never bring it up again lest I end up coming off like a "know it all" (and totally friendless to boot!)

  7. Carolyn, since I've had such a time posting on this essay today (chuckles) ~ just now seeing your question. Perhaps (?) modest apparel is a matter of taste?? I'm not advocating that Christian women must wear dresses (eiks, I know some DO teach that!) nor have their hair up in buns.

    The one pic of BM is very, very nice -- she's one of THEE most attractive ladies I've ever seen!! I'm merely talking about the one pic -- "sexy boots", jeans (look like "hip huggers" to me.... but I don't know if that's just my eyes...??) VERY low cut pants or jeans.... very low belt & even the coat. I dunno' ~ I tend to see the whole outfit as more in the realm of "sexy" and/or domineering even; at least that's my take on it. The Scripture says women are not to wear clothes that call attention to ourselves; of course I full well realize the one on stage in front of 11,000 women IS going to have attention on her regardless of what she's wearing. Carolyn, maybe you think I came across too harsh or hyper critical? If so I appreciate correction. Yet another reason is with this outfit -- she reminds me a LOT of the "women deacons" at the church I mentioned who think nothing of sending their dd's to seminary -- to become preachers.

    Another "red light" to us all regarding this whole scenario is that she did the particular conference at Joel Osteen's church!! Hope everyone got a chance to read Terry James' Monday "Nearing Midnight" column he co-writes with Todd at Rapture Ready. Though I've read much about Joel ~ Terry's was one of the best with distinct points very well made!!

    1. Reva - BM wore jeans and a below thigh length tunic top that has a white band, those are not hip-huggers. You can enlarge the photo to see the top.
      I don't get the "sexy boots" thing. Boots are stylish, they covered her legs. The conference was in January with record low temps and the arena was very cold.
      In the photo above she looks appropriately dressed, not immodest.


  8. ***Thank you Elizabeth for letting Reva and I comment to one another.***

    Hi Reva, I appreciate your follow up. I have looked as closely at that particular picture as I can with my computer resolution, and made it as big as I could, and I guess I don't really have the criticism of her outfit that you see. I see the outfit as stylish, but not one that I would consider attention grabbing, sexy, or domineering. I don't consider her boots as "sexy boots" - they actually look like classic flat equestrian style boots. Also, what looks to you like low slung jeans and a low belt, to me looks like she has a long white shirt that is untucked hanging over her jeans, under some sort of dark sweater (?), which is under the camel colored coat. And considering what some of the men are wearing (2 in jeans), I also don't see her outfit as too informal for this particular setting. Really nothing about the outfit caught my notice, in fact, I didn't even look at it until you mentioned you thought it was not modest.

    As a generality, when it comes to Christian women, I try not to be concerned about what others wear, unless there's something glaringly obvious that is clearly immodest, such as an outfit that is skin tight, or when there is too much skin showing due to hemline or neckline lengths. But since modesty is first and foremost a heart issue, that is what truly needs addressing, not merely the externals. Once the heart posture is corrected, the clothes usually "follow suit". (Pun unintended.) However, we often tend to focus on the outside appearance, because that's what is obvious, but even that can be deceiving: a women can dress like the Amish and still be a provocative woman. So I try to exercise a lot of caution with how I approach this issue. I personally don't take issue with Christian women who are stylish, as long as their godliness shines above and beyond the outward appearance.

    Back to Moore, I agree, she is a very pretty lady, and for what it's worth, I don't know that I've ever seen her dress inappropriately. That said, I am no fan whatsoever of her teaching, as she has wandered down a path of mysticism and other serious doctrinal concerns - like as you said, holding a conference at Osteen's "apostasy center" (I refuse to call it a church!). This is very unfortunate, as many genuine believers are fond of her as a teacher. However, I personally don't feel a need to comment on anything about Moore except the genuine Biblical concerns with her erroneous teaching and current trajectory.

    Hope this helps.

    Thanks again Elizabeth. :)


    1. On second look, yes, it is a white blouse hanging out from a long black top, not a white band on a tunic top.

      "However, I personally don't feel a need to comment on anything about Moore except the genuine Biblical concerns with her erroneous teaching and current trajectory."

      so true.


  9. It is very disconcerting to see Francis Chan, Louie Giglio, John Piper and Beth Moore all pictured together. But more especially John Piper. I'm afraid Dr. Piper is slipping into an ever increasing mystical influence that began even before he “attempted unsuccessfully” to speak in tongues. Francis Chan's presence is disappointing but not shocking. Louie Giglio's involvement is neither shocking nor unexpected.

    What else is not surprising to me is the lack of any SBC intervention or criticism. The SBC has been struggling for years in an attempt to be all things to all people and has understandably failed in that quest. As a consequence, the Steve Lawson’s of the SBC have lost ground and influence. A true preaching and teaching of Biblically sound Reformed Doctrine by SBC churches is now in the minority where it was once the overwhelming majority. This came about largely as a result of and insistence on some degree of individual “Church Autonomy” to which Baptist’s wholeheartedly ascribe. This “independence”, while having certain advantages, has proven to be a blockade in maintaining and embracing consistent and Biblically correct Doctrine. As a result, the SBC, like all other denominations, has member churches that are actually no different than those in the “world “we already know to be false.

    That horrible reality is exactly why the SBC has not weighed in on Mrs. Moore or those SBC churches that are nothing more than the same “seeker sensitive models” inspired by the Rick Warren and his breed. I have been to quite a few of them locally and one SBC pastor actually became quite belligerent when I questioned him. I asked about his very public proclamations (name dropping) regarding his “close and personal relationship” (texting buddies) with Mr. Warren. This SBC Pastor was nothing more than the wolf of which Scripture warns. He constantly begged for money during his services and never once mentioned sin! And he is just one of the many SBC pastors locally and I’m sure nationally as well, who no longer preach the Gospel.

    Bashing the SBC is not my objective here anymore than my taking to task those other churches and denominations that have long since left the “Fold”. But I don’t find it at all shocking or even slightly surprising that the SBC has failed to take any Biblically based corrective or disciplinary actions against Mrs. Moore. She is but one example of the SBC’s failure to act and only further confirms the massive falling away of the Church. Unfortunately, the SBC has a lot of company. Just another sign that we are indeed in “The End Time”!

    2 Thessalonians

    3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the [a]apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,…

    Footnotes: [a] 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Or “falling away” from the faith

    2 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the [a]coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,


    a. 2 Thessalonians 2:1 Or “presence”

    11 For this reason God [a]will send upon them [b]a deluding influence so that they will believe [c]what is false, 12 in order that they all may be [d]judged who did not believe the truth, but [e]took pleasure in wickedness.

    a. 2 Thessalonians 2:11 Lit “is sending”
    b. 2 Thessalonians 2:11 Lit “an activity of error”
    c. 2 Thessalonians 2:11 Or “the lie”
    d. 2 Thessalonians 2:12 Or “condemned”
    e. 2 Thessalonians 2:12 Or “approved”

  10. I keep on hearing that women can't lead or speak in church services.
    What we never talk about is what women CAN do and what their roles are in the church. Does a woman have a purpose beyond being a wife and mother? What about women who are not married and childless? Doesn't Paul say that it's better for women to not marry, so that they can focus on God?

    Also, this is off topic, but what's wrong with a woman having a leadership role outside of the church?
    I would love if someone could answer my questions.

    1. Hello Anonymous,

      I agree that it can be confusing as to what our roles are. It is the same for men, also.They receive the same conflicting messages about their roles too, Culture and bible are always at odds.

      When you say 'does a woman have a purpose beyond being a wife and mother'? is being a mom not enough for you? Do you desire more?

      If you're childless, then that was God's will, since He is the creator of humans, knitting us in the womb. In those cases, of course there are roles for us, the same as there are for young women, wives, and widows.

      Do you *want* a leadership role outside the church? What kind of leadership role do you seek?

      Here is the answer to your question: a sermon series devoted to exactly your questions,

      God's High Calling for Women,

    2. Hi Elizabeth!
      Thank you for your response.
      I'm not a mother, and I'm not married. I haven't even dated anybody ever (I'm 19). I know that I'm young, but to be honest, sometimes I feel like I'm never going to be married or have children. So I find comfort in thinking that God is OK if I don't get married or have kids. I want to find my purpose/place in the world, whether or not that includes being married and having kids or not.

      I don't know if this would be a leadership role, but I'd really love to be a teacher. I could also see myself being a children's theatre director, or something like that. I'm just wondering if females being in authority in any way is wrong.

      Thanks so much :)
      -Liz (I decided to become slightly less anonymous)

    3. Hi Liz,

      We I'm tickled to meet you!

      No, being a teacher is not wrong. Women are teachers of children, and of other women, in churches. Sometimes they are choir directors too. The women in authority goes for women in the structure of the organized worship at the church. Women teach and co- lead groups at home as Priscilla and Aquila did or help people individually in discipling situations. Dorcas (Tabatha) was well loved for her sewing ministry among the women. Offer hospitality, help and encourage and come alongside other brethren. They can do all of that, the only things they can't do it be a pastor or an elder or a teacher.

      Here is a sermon exploring Titus 2:3-5, titled God's Plan for Younger Women, you might enjoy it, and it might give you some answers to your questions

      Being a children's theater director or a teacher of children is perfectly acceptable and also is extremely fulfilling (I taught children for years in church, and in VBS and in the Good News Club in schools). I wish you luck! Be in prayer about these things, remember, the Holy Spirit is your very present helper!

    4. Hi Liz,
      For some reason after reading your anon post last night, I spent last night thinking of encouragements for you.

      Elizabeth is right, other than being an elder, a pastor, or a teacher of men in Biblical matters, there are no restrictions for a woman serving the Lord, whether in the church or in the secular world. God is totally ok with you being single. You are right, Apostle Paul said that singlehood for the Lord is indeed a very blessed calling, for one's interests are not divided, and one can give oneself wholly to the Lord. And dear one, at 19 you are way young to be concerned that you will never marry. :) You are a blossoming young woman!

      Be encouraged! Be fulfilled in Christ! Whether you remain single or ever do marry, whatever station of life you find yourself in, remember that a Christian's life is hidden in Christ, and where we are to find fulfillment and completion.

      I spent time last night and this morning, thinking of all the Christian women I know or know of, young or older, single or married, with or without children, some who work part time, some full time (who either have no children, grown children, or work in a manner that doesn't affect their family - example, one is a teacher in a Christian school whose daughters attend the school; another example, one who runs her own home spun business and sets her own hours). I was reflecting on what they do to serve God, either in or out of church. Here's what I came up with, in no particular order:

      business owner, teacher or teaching paraprofessional (both in and out of church settings, including homeschooling moms), medical professional (registered nurse, dental hygienist, registered dietitian, physician's assistant), PhD scientist, choir director, nail technician, stay at home wife/mom, administrative assistant, lawyer, missionary, bank teller, bank administration, nouthetic counselor (with husband), volunteer, lab technician, librarian, college athletic coach, hospitality, tailor/seamstress, realtor, equestrian instructor and horse trainer

      None of these women are pastors, elders, or hold authority in the church. But all of them serve the Lord wholeheartedly in whatever calling they find themselves in.

      Since you mentioned you would love to be a teacher or a children's theatre director, I want to second Elizabeth's statement, those would be very acceptable and fulfilling callings! Pray, and know that as you take your steps and make your plans, God will direct you.


    5. Thank the Holy Spirit for allowing us to know the truth about Beth Moore! Have had an uncomfortable concern about her for years.

  11. So thankful to sit under your teaching while reading this post. It seems that God has decided to use you, in spite of the fact that you have a uterus. Also good to know that people in the Church are devoting their time to doctrinal head-hunting instead of wasting it on paltry issues like starvation, poverty, social injustice, etc.

    Okay, I'll lay aside my sarcasm. As a female "Christ-follower" who is in leadership at a church, I disagree with most of what you seem to believe with one exception: the Person and work of Christ, His grace for sinners, and our call to be salt and light in the world. I recognize you as a sister in faith, but was unsure of how to handle what I believe are logical inconsistencies and a poor hermeneutic, and so leaned on humor. In all seriousness, would love to dialogue if you are open to it. Blessings.

    1. Holle, I looked up the definition of sarcasm, Got Questions addresses the issue of sarcasm in a biblical way, and notes the difference between irony, sarcasm, and satire

      “Sarcasm is the use of irony (saying one thing while meaning another) or other rhetorical devices in a biting, hurtful way. Sarcasm, on the other hand, is not appropriate. Sarcasm has at its core the intent to insult or to be hurtful with no corresponding love or wish for well-being. Instead, the goal of sarcasm is to belittle the victim and elevate the speaker. Jesus warned against such harsh, unloving words in Matthew 5:22. Our words should be helpful and edifying, even if they are uncomfortable to the hearer.

      Ephesians 4:29 says “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.

      You say you are a leader but coming upon something some woman wrote on some corner of the internet you were “unsure of how to handle” what you read. Hopefully this is not how you dialogue with the weaker sheep who you lead at your church.

      Colossians 4:6 says, Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.

      The church’s mission is not to solve hunger, starvation, poverty or social injustice. It is to share the Good News and make disciples. To that end, we do protect the Word by maintaining purity of doctrine and making sure the sheep are not dragged off by wolves that seek to prey on them with their lies. False doctrine is lies, it brings destruction and leads to death. What good it is to feed a man for a day and ignore the spiritual peril he is in?

      You say I’ve offered a piece what you see are “logical inconsistencies and a poor hermeneutic” but never say how or where. A genuine sister in the faith would seek my correction and well being by using the word of God so that edification can come about.

      I’m sorry, no I am not open to further dialogue with you. You began and ended it with your choice to open a conversation with sarcasm, pride, and condescension. The response to the truths of God’s word should be filled with more God’s word, mutual love for one another in hopes that understanding and unity can come about. You show that your interest is a bitter tongue, (James 3:8-10), demonstrate open rebellion against God’s word (by touting your church leadership), mocking women (the uterus comment), and focusing on solving the world’s poverty and hunger issues rather than exalt God by protecting the sheep you ‘lead’ by protecting His word in them by guarding proper doctrine. Doctrine is important, Doctrine is everything, Holle, the *Gospel* is doctrine.

      In return, I have said all I have to say in this blog piece. The most glaring issue with the commissioning is that the women were ‘commissioned’ to go out to the world and show themselves, not to show Jesus. If you didn’t mourn over that fact, there is nothing else I can say to you that will be of an edifying nature between us. Holle, I pray the word of God will convict your heart of the things said on this page.

  12. Thank you Elizabeth and Carolyn! Those were both very encouraging to read :)
    Elizabeth, I will definitely listen to that sermon.
    Carolyn, thank you so much for your thoughts! The only reason I worry I won't marry is because most girls I know my age have at least had a boyfriend, which I have not. But I know that I am young!
    Thanks again for all the thought you put into your posts :D

    1. Liz, You're welcome. Thank YOU for lifting my soul in that I see the Spirit working in your conversation!! You bring a smile to my heart :)

      Dear one (I call you that because you are 19 and I am 53), if the Lord wants you to marry, He will see you marry. Nothing in the world or the next can thwart His plans. And He does plan for most women to marry. Just be patient, keep submitting to the Spirit so He will sanctify you more each day, so when the time comes to serve your husband as he serves you, you will be able to do so graciously and lovingly. Keep your focus on Jesus and the husband (not boyfriend) will come!

    2. You're welcome Liz.


  13. So Beth Moore is commissioning 11,000 women without first telling these women they must first pray, then run it by their husbands first as the head of their household if they are married, and run it by their pastor or elders of their church? So shouldn't these women also first test the spirits to see if they be of God, and examine Scripture to see if their is even a precedent for this oath? And by what authority does Beth Moore have to even give such an oath?

    1. All excellent questions James. When I attended a Living Proof Conference she had us do these kind of things too, but nothing as formal as a commissioning. She'd have us stand and say affirmations out loud in call and response back to her on the stage, or to each other. I was taking notes throughout the confeence at appropriate times, and I write that I felt very silly during these "Grab the woman next to you and repeat after me..." times Moore is very fond of "repeat after me" during her "instruction". This is what I write on the blog as I published my reaction to this conference:

      "Beth Moore had us do a lot of repeating. Sometimes it was a mantra spoken to the person next to us, as when she said "God has a destiny for you" and urged us to turn to the women in the next seat and repeat, "God has a destiny for you." I am uncomfortable doing that, not the least of which is that I feel silly. I also feel that if the women next to me learns that God has a destiny for her, it was because she learned that from the bible and not from some schmoe at a conference parroting it back to her."

      "Frequently she would have us repeat one of the eight points she was building the lesson around, and repeat it as many as 8 times. She addressed that it might seem silly or overdoing it to repeat these things, but she said, she's a teacher and she knows the value in rote memorization. She's right, but I'd prefer to spend my rote memorization time memorizing actual bible verses and not Beth Moore mantras"

    2. Great first hand testimony Elizabeth. How about doing this: grab the woman standing next to you and telling her that God has a destiny for you following and promoting the false teachers at this conference and leading others into the abyss, and that is this: your destination is the Lake of Fire unless you repent!

    3. And what in the world are 11 thousand God-fearing women doing attending a citadel of darkness, Joe Olsteen's church?

    4. James,

      11,000 is just the tip of the iceberg! The New Age, seeker sensitive, charismatic, health and wealth churches have millions of members world wide.

      Check out the Strange Fire conference videos.

  14. Hi Elizabeth! I encountered your blog just today and have spent much time on it. :) I have several questions for you that I hope you'll have time to answer.

    First of all, the Beth Moore commissioning does seem weird- no lie. And I get all the comments that say her stuff is "overly-emotional." But didn't God create emotion in us? Are we to shut off all emotion when it comes to the word of God? The hugging might make some women uncomfortable, (I get that!) but to some it might be that bit of physical affection they need to get through the day. (Maybe there needs to be a no-hugging section? ;) )

    Secondly, I read the post about Moore's adoption (?). I am wondering if maybe there are legal issues surrounding her silence about it? Maybe Michael has requested that she not talk about it? If it was something only about her, maybe she would talk more, but I would guess it might be out of respect for M and his biological mother. (especially if they are close family members as you point out.)

    Another question about that post (quoting from her book published in 2004). You point out she only uses Jesus' name 8 times. While I'm not a "die-hard defender of her" I am currently reading her book To Live is Christ (about Paul) and I counted her mention Christ/Jesus 5 times on one page?? So I don't think it's fair to criticize her on one book, that is self-touted a memoir and not a theology book. She also wrote a book called "Jesus the one and Only" which I am sure mentions his name often. :)

    I am sure that we could find things that EVERY teacher says that we don't agree with- that's why we have the word of God for ourselves.

    Lastly, about women in their roles. I've been studying the Proverbs 31 lady lately and especially this verse: "She gets up while it is still night;
    she provides food for her family
    and portions for her female servants".
    She had servants?!? To me this suggests that she may have had work outside the home that required the help of servants. I LOVE being a stay at home wife and mom, but maybe it's not for everyone?

    (Also I DO think women can be ordained as deaconesses, for the reason that you say. It's about serving, not leading. But by serving, we become naturally become leaders. :) ) See Romans 16:1-2. Paul depended on Phoebe the deaconess to deliver his letter to the Romans, seems she was pretty important and he trusted her implicitly.

    Anyway, you've give me lots of food for thought and I look forward to hearing from you!

  15. Oh, and one more thing: Moore has no control if men enter under her teaching, just as you have no control over if a man reads your blog and is taught by you! (same for my blog)

    1. Kelli asked: "overly-emotional." But didn't God create emotion in us? Are we to shut off all emotion when it comes to the word of God?

      Yes, emotion is wonderful. God created it. But when it comes to bible teaching, there’s a difference between feeling emotional about the God we worship and expressing humility, awe, reverence, joy etc, and the teacher teaching through her emotions, and/or using emotion to manipulate rather than use the bible to instruct. Moore does the latter. Emotions are her starting point, not the result.

      Kelli asked: About Moore's adoption (?). I am wondering if maybe there are legal issues surrounding her silence about it?

      There well could be legal issues. If so, then why did she write a book about it?

      Transparency in a Christian should be a constant. Not a pick and choose. Either she wants to be transparent and is willing to face follow-up questions, or she should have remained silent if there are legal issues. But she wants it both ways, the publicity from the book (and its royalties) but not to be accountable. This is unscriptural. Leaders have a responsibility to be accountable and those whom leaders serve have the charge to hold them accountable. If Moore sinned in the area of the adoption, we need to know so as to be able to pray for her repentance, and to know if she is disqualified from teaching. More here on the leader-member relationship regarding accountability.

      Kelli said “I am sure that we could find things that EVERY teacher says that we don't agree with- that's why we have the word of God for ourselves.”

      Do not trivialize Moore’s errors. She teaches pop psychology, teaches eisegetically and not exegetically, instills legalism, speaks for God from her visions and private relevations, channels her books from an “entity” or a “force”, takes God’s name in vain, usurps the authority of the home, accepts and promotes Gnosticism AND Mysticism, joins with unbelievers in projects, and more. Yeah. I disagree with that. Further, the bible says we are to mark them (Rom 16:17) and avoid them. (2 Tim 3:5). NOT to tolerate them (Rev 2:20).

      Kelli said: She had servants?!? To me this suggests that she may have had work outside the home that required the help of servants.

      No. It doesn’t. Servants were common in bible days. To NOT have a servant was weird. Indenturing and bond-slavery were viable cultural mechanisms back them. More here

      Kelli it’s important not to look through a modern lens at scriptures. Exegetical teaching means we draw the meaning out of the text from the text itself. Eisegesis means we put our own spin on verses based on our understanding. Moore does eisegesis. You’re doing it too with the Proverbs scripture. You have to look at the entire context- the passages above and below the one you’re learning, and the history and culture behind it, and whether it is parable, poetry, history or doctrine. More here on the difference between eisegesis and

      Women must not be ordained as deacon. Women are not to be decision making leaders in the church. We ALL serve. Leaders in the church are to be men. There is no getting around the clear teaching of scripture on this point. Here is an essay, “Was Phoebe a deaconess?”

      Kelli said: Moore has no control if men enter under her teaching
      Yes absolutely true. I have no problem with that. However Moore does control whether to get on a stage with ordained men and teach from the bible. To teach men on her tv program (Robison, Life Today). Here is Pastor Mike Abendroth asking a good question in a 1-min video. “Where is Beth Moore’ Husband?” referring to the obvious lack of male oversight in her life.

      Hope this helps and thank you for asking

  16. Hey, I SO appreciate your blog. Somehow I missed this "commissioning" discussion previously. It only serves to further support my belief that BM is getting into some serious error, and it didn't just happen overnight. Last Jan. I started a Bible Study at a nearby SBC church, and it was Lisa Harper's study of Hebrews. I wondered how she was going to do Hebrews in 7-8 sessions when my own church was finishing up Hebrews in well over 40 sessions. A couple of things Lisa said bothered me, but I let it go. Perhaps no big deal. But anyway, when BM was the study for the fall session, I emailed the 2 leaders and shared my concerns about her. Wow, they were quite on the defensive! After a couple of exchanges, I just let it drop. I was getting absolutely nowhere. My biggest issue was her her liaison with Joyce Meyer, and they just didn't "get it". Had I known she was partnering with Joel Osteen in the commissioning, I would have added that! This is really not funny, is it! Thanks for keeping up with this. The Joyce Meyer thing with BM was this week, I think. Any chance you can provide a critique of that? Thanks!!!

    1. Thank you for the compliment, I hope the Spirit has worked in a way that's opened your eyes, and it seems like He is. Good for you for the questions you've asked and the issues you've raised.

      I looked at the Joyce Meyer site and sure enough the Beth Moore talk was published today. I started listening and I found two problems in the first 27 seconds. LOL. No surprise. I am headed to church right now but I will finish listening and write a critique tomorrow. Thanks for the jog. I had been looking for it but then forgot.

  17. I have a question about a statement you made. So if a woman works and is the bread winner and the husband stays at home with the kids, the woman is not submitting to her husband? Could this not be something that just works for there family and not a woman trying to take authority over her husband?

    1. Thanks for asking your good question.

      I know that in these economic times, or because a health or other emergency might be happening within a family, that sometimes it personally or professionally makes more sense that the woman works in the world and the husband stays home. I can't make a dogmatic statement about an individual family's circumstance, because I think that is part of Christian liberty. I have to assume they've completed a best practice for them- that they have researched options, prayed, and worked out the best situation for them.

      I also think motivations enter into it. If the man stays home because he is lazy and would rather swap roles, this isn't Christian male leadership. if the women wants to work because she receives her identity through the world's structure and systems and not by her biblical, Christian identity as a submitting woman raising children, this also is a problem.

      As a general Christian societal way of life, however, no, no it is not usually better that the man stays home and the woman works. I mean as a global practice among Christians. For example, our society in America has seen a massive shift within my lifetime, where most women used to stay home and the man worked; to practically expecting women to work outside the home, and where it has become acceptable for the man to stay home instead. Is our society better for it now, compared to the era when the opposite was true? I personally do not think so. The woman's priority biblically should be raising the young children at home and the man leads the family, normally in bread winning. That said,

      Here are a couple of essays for you that discuss the issue of women working outside the home from both sides. None of these truly address the other part of your issue, house husbands, but I think we can assume a mirror image.

    2. One other thing occurred to me this morning. It is significant.

      Remember back in Genesis 3, after the Fall, God cursed the serpent, the man and the woman. Of the man, He said the reason He was cursing Adam is that he listened to His wife (Instead of God). Of the woman, her curse was that her desire will be for her husband but he shall rule over her.

      This is taken to mean that the cursed natural inclination will be that the woman will strive to dominate the man and he will tend to cave, rather than the opposite situation that God wants (Eph 5). Any living situation, such as woman as the economic head and the man as household wife, will add fuel to an already cursed fire.

  18. Beth Moore has shown to be consistent in quoting the bible and applying it to life. Sometimes critics can get so bogged down with administration that they lose their focus and become misguided. I see nothing wrong with the commissioning statement as it makes proclamations about biblical truths and applying it to women that come to these conferences. I can applaud Elizabeth ,the author ,for utilizing her 1st Amendment right of free speech and religion. But applaud MORE for Beth Moore

    1. Hi shauna,

      Anyone can quote the Bible and apply it to life. Mormons do. Catholics do. Unbelievers do. And...false teachers do.

      "having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people." (2 Tim 3:5)

      I don't know what you mean by your phrase, some 'critics' get "so bogged down in administration" but that has nothing to do with discerning whether a teacher is rightly dividing the word of truth. (2 Tim 2:15). Moore isn't.

  19. Thank you for your response of Aug 17, 2016.

    I will reiterate, I appreciate Americans utilizing their 1st Amendment rights of free speech and religious freedom, as is the case here.

    In response to your first paragraph, agreed, anyone can quote the bible and apply it, as is the case with this blog. But do they? No, not always the case with the Jehovah's Witnesses- as their pamphlet last year misquoted a verse from the Bible about Angels. I had about 5-6 visits from them and agreed to read their pamphlet if they would hear what I had to say. To conclude ,they could not deviate from their scripted grid of the importance of sending wheat to all the world when I spoke about U>S>A> issues like text books in their kids' school being re-written ,Muslims killing Christians and infiltrating this country, and Christ is the son of God. ( See "Muslim Maffia" written by an FBI agent, "Act For America" findings regarding rewritten text books ( Bridget Gabriels' group)). I feel the misquotation from the Watchtower was intentional, because their teaching do not coincide with core Christian principals of faith, therefore they had to misquote/tweek it, to apply it.

    This is what is going on outside of the four corners of the church today, people are misinformed, Godless, and clueless. And inside the church, quarreling amongst themselves.

    You quote 2 Tim 3:5 in your second paragraph. Isn't the POWER in that verse being denied ( by the unGodliness one) the power evident in the core christian principles we hold ,like the fact there is a risen Redeemer and indwelling of the holy spirit working within believers?( see Spirit Filled Life Bible ,New King James version ,Editor Hayford Litt. D, 2 Tim 2:5, fn 3:1-9. Also here mentioning comparing Jannes and Jambres, the Egyptian magicians who opposed Moses because of their base and perverted minds in Ex. 7) Therefore, this verse says stay away from THOSE types of false teachers where they deny the very core of christianity. And nothing about applying to those who are questioned by other believers as to whether they send "women of faith' out to tell the good news properly or not.

    From what you have provided here, Beth Moore acted in accordance with the Great Commission. Matt 28:17 . She acknowledged it is Christ who has authority given to him in heaven and earth, not her. It is also key that it is a conference for "woman of faith", as contained in your article.

    And lastly, to clarify your statement you don't understand what I mean about "critics being bogged down in administration", the meaning is in the verse exactly before the one you quoted, 2 Tim 2:15, which warns that theological quarreling is ruinous,

    Remind them of these things, charging them before the Lord not to strive
    about words to no profit, to the ruin of the hearers.

    To conclude, your blog seems to have a lot of well-versed, well intentioned ,and smart ladies who want to advocate for their Lord. I believe they would be extremely instrumental practicing the truth and persuading others as opposed to extinguishing others' efforts to spread the Good News as Christ commissioned us all to.

    We can be confident in the below;

    Thank God that we have HIS word,

    All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness 2 TIM 3;16.

    1. Thank you for your clarification. No need to reiterate the first amendment right to free speech, which you are enjoying on this blog. I never challenged it.

      The verse at 2Tim 3:5, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people” refers to false teachers. They present an external form of godliness but deny its power because they are not saved and thus do not have the Holy Spirit in them. This is Beth Moore. She presents a form of godliness but has no power. We are warned to avoid such people.

      The 2 Tim:14 verse which you mentioned about not quarreling about mere words does not mean fail to correct, rebuke, and challenge those who pervert the truth. We are given commands to do just that all over the NT. We also know that doing so WILL provoke those who pervert the truth and cause controversy. By your standard, no one would ever correct anyone who taught wrongly or say anything remotely controversial. So what can the verse correctly mean? The 1 Tim 2:14 verse which says
      Remind them of these things, and charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers.

      Which means do not argue with false teachers who are “deceivers who use human reason to subvert God’s word is foolish and futile and dangerous (2 Tim 2:16-17, Prov14:17, Matt 7:6, JMacArthur).

      I and other women who read this blog DO want to extinguish the commissioning of women who teach falsely or who have been disciple under false teachers. We see that Jesus strongly hates such matters. The church at Thyatira tolerated a false prophetess, a metaphorical Jezebel (like the SBC tolerating Moore) and Jesus said He wanted her to repent, gave her time to repent, but she refused to repent, therefore He will KILL her and her (spiritual) children dead. (Rev 2). He does not want women carrying the seeds of satan to all the world. He wants properly commissioned (meaning well-taught and rightly dividing people) to offer the true Gospel. We strive to stop the mouths (extinguish) those who are thieves and robbers and upset whole households (Titus 1:11).

      I am sorry you do not want to but instead accept false teachers blithely “commissioning” women who have parroted mere words and are pronounced acceptable to God and ready to go into the world.

      I’m also sorry you 'see nothing wrong' with a false teacher uniformly and ignorantly commissioning 11,000 women to go out and affirm a Jesus with which Moore has no sure knowledge that all of them, or indeed, any of them, actually know Jesus in the first place. More importantly, I’m sorry you can’t see that Moore is a false teacher to begin with. Here is a link to 50+ critiques of her false teaching written by me, other women, and men & pastors. Reading these may clarify some for you. Thanks.

      A link to another critique of the commissioning by someone not me, maybe another perspective will help

      50+ critiques:


Post a Comment