Confronting
YWAM’s Crusader: Concerns Regarding the Teachings of Danny Lehmann
I write this article with great sadness and a sorrowful heart. In these days, alas, the time comes when men who care about the truths of God and His holy Word must stand and speak accordingly with boldness and, as we find it necessary, to contend for the faith once for all delivered (Jude 3). It is in this spirit I write the following things in the form of a dire warning and a heartfelt concern for any who will read this. The times and circumstances demand this so, by God’s grace, this article is meant to be seen as giving the truth with love (Eph. 4:15).
The matter which is here in view involves the worsening state of the mission organization YWAM (Youth with a Mission) and its quickening slide into truly dangerous doctrines and practices. These practices are found in the Word/Faith, Church Growth Movement, “Christian” mysticism and emergent philosophies touted and embraced by YWAM leaders and subsequently taught to precious young people at the DTS’s or in even a more recent forum, and specific to this article, a prominent Calvary Chapel pulpit in Hawaii.
Danny Lehmann is an evangelist/pastor/teacher/mission recruiter/ radio host/author who has given a great deal of his life to furthering the goals and directives of YWAM. He is also the teacher at Calvary Chapel Komo Mai’s Saturday night service called Mars Hill in Aiea, Hawaii. He is well known across the world for his speaking on missions and evangelism. Recently, he has been promoted to the head of evangelism on the YWAM GLT (Global Leadership Team) under John Dawson, the president of the organization.
I refer to him as a “crusader” because he is definitely on a mission that involves promoting the agenda and furthering the reach of YWAM in the world. He contends vigorously on behalf of their policies and leaders and uses no uncertain terms in his descriptions of any including myself who would confront him or the organization he represents.
Over the years I (and others) have approached him about several concerns I had about where YWAM was heading and what he and others were teaching and promoting publicly to many in Hawaii and over the airwaves at KLHT 1040 AM from his Word to the World broadcast. To be frank, he has been quite unwilling to meet or dialogue about any of these things and in the rare occasion we did speak he expressed great vitriol and resentment for even being questioned about very valid issues. To say he has been evasive is accurate as well as a frequent distorter of the situations, i.e. he has personally believed and told others that he was being personally attacked by others and myself who have deep concern over issues related to his ministry and YWAM.
This article is written as a last resort after many attempts to meet with him on these issues. Others and myself have repeatedly sought to sit down and dialogue and discuss several points of concern but he has been largely unwilling, yet has still taught others that leadership must deal with error, be approachable, and humbly receive correction from others in the Body of Christ (he has appealed to Matt. 18 but refused at almost every turn to meet and reconcile with others who need it). Others close to him in ministry as well have been evasive and unwilling to help the reconciliation process despite being quick to point out that that’s what needs to be done. Through it all, Lehmann has emerged unchallenged and therefore free in his mind to continue teaching bad doctrine and in recent cases, heresy from his platforms.
The sad fact is that this article must be written to inform any who are concerned about the nature of the errors being endorsed promoted and blatantly taught by Mr. Lehmann currently and recently. The situation here has reached extreme danger with a spiritual hazard level of somewhere around code red and climbing, so what follows is an analysis of some of his more prominent teachings in the last year or two (2005-2006) and the most devastating assertions that many of us can even remember being taught.
To be sure, these things were not traditionally taught from Calvary Chapel pulpits and this is all the more reason to sound the alarm. If those perpetuating and teaching these things refuse to listen and respond, then perhaps you, dear reader will be a “Berean” (Acts 17:10-15) and follow through with the biblical commands to test all things (1 Thess. 5:21; 1 Jn. 4:1-6) warn about and avoid false teachers in these last days (Matt 7:15; Matt 24; Eph. 5:11; 2 Tim. 3;10-4:5; Titus 3:10-11; 2 Pet. 3:17). Especially of those who call themselves brothers and yet speak not according to God’s word.
This series of articles is in no way comprehensive in scope but I believe you will find the things written herein to be informative as to why I have such a deep concern both for Mr. Lehmann, YWAM, and any who would sit under or hear some of these teachings. The articles are also linked throughout to good information which gives even more support to some of the concerns listed.
A number of years ago Lehmann was confronted about his endorsement of a
certain book entitled Two Trees… by Rick Joyner, a false prophet who is
part of the New Apostolic Reformation. (I first was introduced to his writings
through a YWAMer who received the book at a DTS!). Lehmann denied that he was
endorsing Joyner but insisted instead that he was promoting another false
teacher named Francis Frangipane who also promotes Latter Rain teachings. At
any rate, Rick Joyner authored a book entitled Two Trees Were in the Garden.
Imagine my surprise, then when I heard two trees being referenced in
several of his sermons in 2005. Having been criticized by Lehmann in the past
for not reading enough I decided to take him up on his challenge and discovered
the actual source of his teachings. It needs to be noted that one gets the
distinct feeling that much of what one hears in his messages may have been
borrowed from somewhere else and this proved to be the case here as well.
Lehmann may have actually first heard of this treatment of the two trees
from YWAM International leader Jim Stier’s address to YWAM staff and leadership
at the Viva Latin America Global Leadership Team Conference in Belo Horizonte,
Brazil, Sept. 2005 (Lehmann was in attendance):
“When the crowd finally settled, Jim Stier was able to give his
message. It was an exhortation not to
eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, with it’s comparison,
judgment and legalism, but to eat from the tree of Life.” http://www.ywamconnect.com/sites/Founders/ywamReports?multcontentitemid=186211
Just recently, a recommended
reading section was posted on YWAM International’s site at http://ywam.org/books/LeadersRead/default.htm
(May 2006). In the section What YWAM
Leaders Read and Recommend. In addition
to a variety of questionable titles from the emergent authors, Lehmann
recommends Repenting of Religion by Gregory Boyd and gives it a 10, on a scale of 1-10.
“The main thesis of the book is this;
either we are walking with the Lord on a daily basis from a perspective of
judging others (eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) or
walking in love (eating from the tree of life!).
I found the spiritual application of the two trees to be
enlightening as I seek to follow Jesus who “came not to judge the world but to
save the world.” … Boyd addresses the main passages that command us not to
judge one another. He suggests that we ask ourselves a simple question whenever
we encounter anyone: Am I walking in love or am I walking in judgment?
He gives practical advice on how to deal with what he calls
“Rage of the Pharisees” which is his synonym for judgmental, critical,
mean-spirited Christians who love to criticize others. He contrasts that with
the way of Jesus, who (while not compromising the faith) exhibited
humility and tolerance, and believed the best about others.”
Well,
the mystery was solved as to the origins of this teaching but what is attached
to it is extremely troubling. Who is Gregory Boyd? His views have been
identified as neo-theism, or open theism where God does not always know the
future until man makes a decision. This faulty premise moved Boyd to discover
his “own responsibility in bringing about the future.” (God of the Possible, p. 8).
He
writes: “It is true that according to the open view things can
happen in our lives that God didn’t plan or even foreknow with certainty
(though he always foreknew they were possible). This means that in the open
view things can happen to us that have no overarching divine purpose” (God of the Possible, p.153).
This theory makes God not as infinite or omniscient as the Bible describes and incidentally may serve as the theoretical underpinnings of Danny Lehmann’s teachings that God is not ultimately in control over all things.
The bottom line here is this: Boyd and his theories are problematic and downright false and it displays a real lack of discernment for Lehmann to recommend others to read this authors books. As we will see Lehmann’s subsequent usage of the “two trees” theory is a world of error all its own, ending in a tragic conclusion.
It should be noted that the application Lehmann uses concerning these two trees is HIS analogy. It is not in the Scriptures in this fashion at all. Right away, we see that Lehmann’s understanding of the two trees has problems in its premise:
“This tree of
life is given to us symbolically in the book of Genesis and its also given to
us in the last book of the Bible in the last chapter of the last book of the
Bible, the Book of Revelation…” (Danny Lehmann “The Tree of Life” 9/18/05).
Symbolically?
Really? I think not. We have every reason to believe that the Tree of Life was
literal and actual as found in Genesis. This kind of interpretation leads him
to employ “eating from the trees” in an almost mystical fashion and pertaining
to how judge others. Quoting Rev. 22:14, he says:
“Isn’t that a
beautiful picture that’s given to us here? The leaves of the tree of Life are
for the healing of the nations. What’s going to heal the nations out there in
the world? Christians who are eating from the tree of knowledge of good and
evil? ‘You’re down you’re down you’re wrong you’re wrong you’re up you’re up’
or Christians that eat from the tree of life and use those leaves of the tree
to heal the nations of the world. They pick that fruit once a month and its
giving fruit all the time to give life to the nations of the world. I
want to suggest that we eat from the tree of life…” (Danny Lehmann “The
Tree of Life” 9/18/05).
Is Rev. 22:4 being fulfilled symbolically in some fashion today? Do you know of any Christian that has eaten from this tree? This is not a biblical interpretation but a new analogy that does not uphold the meaning of the scripture. It is future tense, about those who can enter the New Jerusalem that has come down from heaven to earth. The tree “is in the midst of the Paradise of God’”(Rev 2:7), which is described as “And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life” (Rev. 22:1-2).
He continues:
“Now if
you’ve been here that last couple of weeks or months or so I’ve been trippin’
out a lot on the two trees that were in the middle of the garden, the tree of
life and the tree of knowledge and good and evil…I’ve been pointing out that we
need to eat, as Christians, from the tree of life. And the tree of knowledge
and good and evil in a sense is the tree of religion. It’s the tree when we in
our fallen perception look at what is good and evil and then we form our
judgments and our norms and our standards and if we’re Muslims, we have a
Muslim set of norms and standards, and if we’re Hindu we have Hindu sets of
norms and standards, If we’re Buddhist, we have Buddhist sets of norms and
standards. and some of us what we do is we get the Christian gospel and then we
form our own set of little boxes that we put God in and we forget about he tree
of life and we’ve used the Pharisees as illustrations of people who did it the
wrong way” (Danny Lehmann 11/12/05 Sat. PM “Mars Hill”).
It appears that this teaching has been made from his own set of standards Note at this point a little further along in his teachings he now equates wrongful judging with somehow eating from the wrong tree and righteous judging by eating of the proverbial tree of life. Lehmann must change these trees to be symbolic for them to be used today. Since they were both literal trees destroyed in the flood one cannot be actually eating from either one. Even the tree of life is has future application for the believer, not present.
One wonders where
this line of thought is coming from. He also asserts that the Pharisees, the
enemies of Christ, “ate from this wrong tree”, something Jesus never said:
“…Now the
Pharisees in the Bible were eating from the tree of knowledge and good and
evil. Remember those guys? They’re eating from the tree of knowledge of good
and evil (Makes eating
sound) ‘I’m a Pharisee and I go to church 3-4 times and week and I judge you
as being unspiritual because you don’t go to church as much as I do. You’re
down, thumbs down on you. I don’t like you thumbs down on you. Oooh there’s
another Pharisee just like me.’ And so Pharisees eat from that tree. Now all of
a sudden Jesus shows up, who is the tree of life right? Jesus heals a man on
the Sabbath day so (makes eating sound again) ‘Healing on the Sabbath
day huh? Healing on the Sabbath day!’ Jesus said ‘Hey wait a minute if any one
of you folks had an ox or a cow who fell into a pit on the Sabbath day, you’d
get it out and you’re getting mad at me because I helped a human being on the
Sabbath day?’”(Danny Lehmann
“Mars Hill” Sermon sat. PM Sept. 24,
2005).
According to
Lehmann, then, wrongful judging and everything the Pharisee stood for is
equated and somehow related to the analogous eating from the Tree of Knowledge
of good and evil. Now, the plot thickens because Lehmann at least seems to
grasp the seriousness of the crime in Eden, although if one or both of the
trees were “symbolic” as he implied earlier then we have an even a larger problem
but notice here:
“Don’t eat from
the tree of knowledge and good and evil because it’s a tree of death. In the
day that you eat of that tree you will surely die. “(Danny Lehmann “Mars Hill” Sermon sat. PM
Sept. 24, 2005).
“Keep in mind this is no little deal here. This is the
original sin. This is the original sin that infected us with the sin nature
from the very beginning…”(Danny Lehmann “The Tree of Life” 9/18/05).
These two statements
show that at least he has some understanding of the implications of Adam and
Eve’s sin. It was an awful display of disobedience that was followed by the
Curse! Eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil was dire and wicked!
And this makes Lehmann’s later conclusion all the more staggering…
Danny Lehmann
says Jesus could’ve eaten from it!!!:
“…Jesus could’ve
eaten from the tree of knowledge and good and evil and judged us according to
our sins and we would have been in the evil category, but He ate from the tree
of life and said ‘Father forgive them because they don’t know what they’re
doing…’” (Danny Lehmann “Mars Hill” Sermon sat. PM Sept. 24,
2005).
I cannot judge his
heart or motives but why he would utter such blasphemy I can’t imagine! I had
to listen to this several times before the weight of this assertion really
registered as the utter heresy that it is!
Follow this
carefully: If eating the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and
evil brought death and plunged the entire creation into the Curse, if it was
truly a failed test of obedience and the original sin, if Lehmann and others
teach that it is a symbol of wrongful, Pharisaical judgment, THEN to apply this
literally or in this case by analogy that Jesus Christ could have partaken in
sin this way is heresy. For it distorts the Bible’s teaching on the very nature
of the God-man Jesus Christ.
We need understand that it was Jesus the Son of God who instructed Adam and Eve NOT to eat from the tree in the first place: Gen. 2:17 “You must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will die."(See also Gen. 3:9-11) One must ask then why would anyone even dare to think that Jesus could have done this, literally or figuratively, and been capable of rendering any kind of false judgment? This made-up theology of Lehmann has to be rejected as untrue. Considering that Jesus (God) gave this instruction only to Adam and Eve and after their fall no one had access to any of these trees to eat from them.
Lehmann is here
asserting that Christ could have sinned after the fashion of Adam and Eve,
after the fashion of the Pharisees, His accusers and opposers! This needs to be
repented of! This is an affront to the pure, sinlessness of the Son of God and
has no place being taught in a Calvary Chapel, on the Calvary Satellite
Network, or indeed in any corner of the Body of Christ! This is heresy!
Consider the true
words of W. E. Best on this matter:
“The idea that
Jesus Christ could be tempted is unfounded in the Biblical concept of Christ’s
Person. Since Christ did not have a sin nature, solicitation to do something
contrary to God’s will could not be entertained in His holy thought. Therefore,
He could not be tempted. A study of James 1:2-15 proves that temptation has no
power over a perfect Person…Jesus Christ, during His days in the flesh was
holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners (Heb. 7:26). To suggest
that He had a nature subject to sin is nothing short of blasphemy…None who
understands the Biblical teaching concerning the Person of Jesus Christ could
entertain a thought that He could desire the unlawful or forbidden. That is why
James said, ‘God cannot be tempted with evil.’” (W. E. Best, Christ Could Not Be Tempted).
Please understand
dear reader. This is the inherent danger of going beyond what is written,
whether it concerns the subject of the two trees or the nature of Christ
Himself. We must trust God’s Word in all things and never, even by inference or
analogy, deduce that Christ could have been capable of such sin. Jesus Christ
could never have partaken of sin of any kind including one of disobedience and
wrongful judgment!
Concerning the
nature of Christ, Lehmann also asserts:
“Jesus was not in a box. You see Jesus
wasn’t, well, let me see. Now Jesus could’ve surrendered to the fear of man.
You see Jesus could’ve come under the religious spirit and he could’ve said
“Oh I better not heal the guy on the Sabbath Day because this might fit under
one of their little 39 laws. Now Jesus wasn’t thinking He wanted to break the
Sabbath Day, but Jesus “well, maybe they’ll think this, maybe that guy will
think that and maybe I better not do this because…” (Danny Lehmann “On Fire” KLHT
1040 AM Sat. afternoon Oct. 21, 2005).
“Jesus
could’ve surrendered to the fear of man”? Was it possible that the very
Son of God, the God-man, could have “come under the religious spirit”
and wavered in whether or not to submit to the Pharisees, His enemies? One must
ask what kind of Christ is this? Where in the Bible does it say this?
Lehmann musing on
Jesus “could have” departs from the Scriptures actual meaning into his own
imagination. Jesus opposed the Pharisees on every point and did not
waver in his thinking. He submitted to the will of God in everything He did, He
was sinless (Jn.8:46, 9:16; Heb.4:15). There seems to be a lot of “could haves”
in Lehmann’s teachings.
Believer, this is
the crux of the issue and the core of our concern with Danny Lehmann’s
teachings! By saying Jesus could have sinned in any way is again blasphemous
and certainly has nothing to do with the sinless character of Jesus as revealed
to us in the Bible. And although this assertion is not found in the Bible, that
Jesus could have sinned or god could make a mistake IS a tenet of Moral
Government Theology that YWAM used to adhere to. Could this be a remnant of
that shameful legacy?
Sadly, these very
assertions have gone completely unchallenged to my knowledge for reasons
unknown but its time these were answered for.