Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

Some denominationalists are beginning to become alarmed at the manner in which radio and television evangelists are developing a following. Literally thousands of people are choosing to stay away from worship services, opting to listen to a television evangelist instead. Frankly, I have little sympathy for the denominationalists who are just now becoming alarmed at what prime time religion is doing to the local church. For years they have been teaching that a person can be saved without being a member of the local church. Those who are choosing to listen to a radio or television program instead of going to a local church are only doing what denominational preachers have been preaching for many years.

Many denominations are losing membership. Consequently, they are looking around to find out what is happening. One of the things which they are finding is that many Americans are getting their religion via radio and television without ever becoming affiliated with a local church.

One should only expect that material is going to be printed regarding these prime time radio and television evangelists. One of the more recent books published is Give Me That Prime-Time Religion by Jerry Sholes. Sholes is the son of an ordained Presbyterian clergyman. He joined the staff of Oral Roberts in January 1975 to assist in the television productions put out by Oral Roberts. His book is an exposure of some of the methods and finances of the Oral Roberts ministry. The book is not carefully documented; it is good or bad in direct proportion to the reliability of Jerry Sholes’ testimony. However, as an insider, he deserves to be heard.

Oral Roberts As Seen By Jerry Sholes

As one who worked with Oral Roberts and saw the inside of his ministry, Jerry Sholes reached several conclusions. Here are some of them:

1. The finances of Oral Roberts’ ministry. Sholes related that Oral Roberts’ mail room is equipped to handle 20,000 letter per day. He related that 90% of those letters contain a contribution and the average contribution is $5.00. The daily income of the Oral Roberts’ ministry from the mail room alone would tally $90,000 per day or $450,000 per week. This comes to $23,400,000 per year from mail room contributions alone (p. 8).

In addition to the mail contributions, Oral Roberts would conduct six to nine seminars per year at Oral Roberts University. These seminars are not extended periods of concentrated study; they are fund raising seminars. Usually people who have previously supported Oral Roberts are invited to the seminar. The group meets together for a time during which Roberts presents his principle of seed-faith (give away from your need, give God your best and expect back). If a person expects a miracle from God, he must give big. During the seminar, a project on which Roberts is working is presented with pledge categories ranging from $100,000 to $250. Generally the take from one of these seminars ranges from $1.5 to $3 million (pp. 30-33). Hence, another $15 to $25 million are generated through the seminars.

The total annual flow of money for the Oral Roberts ministries is approximated at $60,000,000. The prime time religion is certainly a financially profitable religion.

2. The giver. Sholes described the average giver to the Oral Roberts’ ministry as follows:

. . . the typical profile of an Oral Roberts supporter is a person who has terrible personal problems. Those problems are usually bad health, a bad marriage, a bad financial situation, or a bad relationship with someone or something. A person who has those kinds of problems is obviously going to be looking for solutions. Chances are that person is going to experience some kind of emotional catharsis in either solving his problems or being taken under by them. That person is looking for a way out! And, now, from what this man, Oral Roberts, is saying, it looks like he might have some answers! That viewer is going to sit there in front of his set at home and watch what comes next, once he is in that frame of mind (p. 24).

That is about the conclusion I would have expected. The desperate person is grasping for straws for help; Roberts offers a chance for help and he grabs.

3. The affluence of Oral Roberts. The affluence of Roberts and his tendency to flaunt his wealth attracted a good bit of attention by Sholes. He wrote,

. . . Oral’s wardrobe is obtained from Brioni and most of the suits he wears each and every day have a price tag of at least $500. He wears $100 shoes and drives $25,000 cars which are replaced approximately every six months. He is a member of Southern Hills Country Club, the most prestigious and elite country club in Tulsa. The membership fee alone at Southern Hills Country Club is $18,000 (which includes a share of stock valued at $9,000) and, in addition to that, members are charged monthly dues of $130. Oral and his son also belong to the ultra-posh Thunderbird Country Club in Rancho Mirage, California. They joined with a membership cost $20,000 each.

The jewelry which Oral has come to enjoy wearing on his hands and wrists has become a source of concern for some of his own employees in his Editorial Department . . . the department which puts out his monthly magazine. Artists within that department have begun putting an airbrush to his fingers and wrists in order to hide the diamond rings and the solid gold bracelets he has begun wearing within the past five years (pp. 132-133).

In addition to these features, Sholes discusses the ownings of Oral Roberts, including his 258 acre ranch, his house which was valued at $60,000 in the mid-fifties, his airplane runway and 12-passenger executive plane, etc. God’s humble servant is surely doing pretty well out in Tulsa.

4. No miracles. I was particularly interested in noticing whether or not Jerry Sholes observed any miracles during the period that he worked with Roberts. Commenting on the fund raising tactics of the seminars conducted by Roberts, Sholes related that he frequently heard the staff coming in talking about how many dollars were raised at a given seminar but never heard anyone talking about how many were healed. He said,

. . . Usually, during a seminar, there were participants who were in wheelchairs. I never saw anyone healed of anything and that bothered me. I saw people who had come expecting a healing and I saw the raw hope and desire in their eyes. If faith could have brought them up out of those wheelchairs, they would have come out and been ready to run a 50-yard dash, on the spot! It never happened.

Oh, once in a while someone would get up out of a wheelchair and limp off the stage. But, I’d seen them a day or two before get out of their wheelchairs to get into cars or go into the restroom. They weren’t total and incurable wheelchair cases. They merely needed the wheelchairs for comfort because of the particular illness they had. They could, however, get up and walk short distances if they had to, or if they really wanted to. They really wanted to for Oral, so they’d do it and then return to their wheelchairs backstage. It was a dog and pony show!

I never, on a Monday morning after a seminar, ever heard one person in the organization talk about how many people were healed during a seminar. The only figures I ever heard relating to seminars were dollar figures! (p. 34).

Another distressing incident related by Sholes tells the story of a faculty member at Oral Roberts University who had a baby to die. He relates the story as follows:

. . . He and his wife had a young baby who became ill. This particular faculty member apparently decided to really put the power of prayer to the test and began praying for the child rather than taking it to a hospital. The baby’s illness became more and more severe until the infant actually died right in the home of the faculty member.

That, in itself, is sad enough. But, the story gets worse. The couple then decided to begin praying and fasting to bring the infant back to life. In addition, they requested that Oral come into their home and also pray for the child. The words used by a certain ORU Vice-President to describe Oral’s reaction to that request were, “He wouldn’t touch that with a ten-foot pole. That dead baby was in their home (the faculty couple’s home) for three days before I could get a doctor in there and get the baby out of the house. A story like that would ruin Oral. The press would crucify him” (p. 38).

To say the least, Jerry Sholes saw nothing, according to the testimony of his book which would lead him to believe that God was working miracles through Oral Roberts.

Many other incidents of interest regarding Oral Roberts were cited in the book Give Me That Prime-Time Religion which I think many of our readers will want to purchase. It is available through Truth Magazine Bookstore at the price of $8.95.

Other Shenanigans By TV Evangelists

One does not have to look far to find that what is stated with reference to Oral Roberts is true of other faith healers. For example Leroy Jenkins, a faith healer who has traveled all over the country, is presently serving time in jail in connection with an arson charge. Yet, he continues to operate his ministry from prison, according to the last reports which I heard.

Frankly, I would not send a dime to any of these primetime evangelists even if I agreed with them doctrinally, which I do not. I would hope that our doctrinal teaching from the Scriptures has demonstrated that one should not support a false teacher (cf. 2 John 9-11); however, if it has not, maybe this expose by Jerry Sholes will cause some to take a closer look before writing a $5.00 check and mailing it to one of them.

The money can be used best by personally seeing to it that the poor are helped, some needy preacher is supported, or contributing to the needs of the local church. In these cases, the opportunity for abuse is greatly reduced. The individual can see the good that is being done with his money. Moreover, he will not be duped into thinking that he will get a bundle of money or a miracle of healing in return for his contribution.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 39, pp. 627-629
October 2, 1980

By June Elliott

The problem of suffering is one that is strange to us all, but when we can think of it as a school of learning, it does help. What better way is there to learn to be more patient, humble, and to have a deeper faith in our God?

When we are down we learn to lean on God and to thank Him more when things are going good for us. After being through one of these times, we can appreciate our good health even more. So, if we have never suffered, then how can we know the real joy of being well and whole? Also, through our suffering we can help one another better to wipe away one another’s tears, or listen to them with a heart that knows and understands.

Job suffered so much, and he felt much like us I am sure; but he kept his faith and submitted himself to his God as we must do. So as we suffer, the time seems so long, but really it is short compared to what we will have with our God if we remain faithful through it all.

I have suffered little compared to many, but it has helped me in so many ways to understand better someone else who is suffering. But most of all, it has helped me to trust God more and more, and to realize I needed that. It is not easy to suffer sometimes, and as we try to put on the whole armor of God (Eph. 6:13-18), we may feel sometimes it is wearing a bit thin. Through these times of suffering and trial, however, it seems to renew and grow stronger once more. Thus our suffering is not in vain. I once knew a lady who was tied to her bed for seven or eight years. She could not even get up to get a drink of water. I went to see her many times, and she was surely an inspiration to me, as she would feel sorry for me because of some small pain I might be suffering. I would think to myself, now here is a lady that with every movement of her small, frail body brings about great pain; and yet she tries to cheer another. I would ask her about this, and she would say, “Honey, I have been in this bed a long time, so I want to help someone else.” I would go away many times feeling ashamed and more humble and thankful than before.

I know that I will never forget this lady and the lesson that I learned from her, as she is now gone on to her reward. Yes, I know these times are hard, but I do believe that all things work together for our good, as Rom. 8:28 says, if we try hard to see the good that comes from our suffering!

I think back to the time I sought peace, and by the time I was 25 years old I faced six operations, been through many other things I will not go into, and I was most miserable because I had not learned yet to really trust in God and His mercy. I began to search and look deeper and deeper, and pray harder by submitting myself to God and asking for courage and strength to face whatever might lie ahead for me. I found this blessed peace that only those sleepless nights can sometimes bring about. So I quit complaining so much, and realized I could not change a lot of things. But through prayer and faith, I could even smile through the most of them.

Sickness is really a ‘blessing in so many ways, because through it we really meditate on spiritual things, find peace, help others, learn to be patient, and to humble ourselves so we can have these wonderful blessings. If we truly trust in God and His mercy to see us through, as Rom. 8:35-39 tells us, nothing can separate us from the love of God. And they will not, if we will not give in and have too much self pity. So as we begin to question, “Why is God doing this to me?”, we need to remember He does not do it, but allows it to go on sometimes to help in so many ways because He loves us and will not let us suffer more than we can stand.

Oh yes, we must put on our armor to help us through these times (Eph. 6:13-18), and try hard even though it will be battle worn and frail at times. Yet I know we all will not be able to say as the apostle Paul said in 2 Tim. 4:6-8, “I am ready to be offered and the time of my departure is at hand, I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness.” What a wonderful thought here! So, as Christians, we will suffer and sometimes it seems even more so; but we have blessings that are more precious than gold.

I hope the things I have said will help another to bear those days that will be filled with pain and sleepless nights. Turn to the Lord, and let Him comfort you. I would like to close with a poem I wrote when I was in pain:

Look To The Lord

Sometimes life on this earth is hard to bear,

All the problems, strife, and pain seem so unfair!

Oh, but there’s one who’ll walk with you all the way,

Who’ll give you courage, strength, and be your stay!

So as you may cry aloud or softly weep,

And your pathway seems ever so steep,

Look to the Lord and promises He gave,

For your soul He will surely save.

This is far worth more than any gold,

He will give you blessings that are lovely to behold.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 39, p. 626
October 2, 1980

By Steve Willis

A recent book, The Aquarian Conspiracy: Personal and Social Transformation in the 1980s (Marilyn Ferguson, 1980), calls for a number of personal, social and ideological changes. Though some of the book is definitely against the Bible as our sole guide, it does point out some interesting developments in the world about us. One such development is the growing sense of inadequacy in the usual tenets of evolution. The book not only points out the failings of the theory, but calls for an acceptance of changes in the theory – changes to meet the failings. Evolution evolves!

As Ferguson points out the failings of the Darwinian theory, see if she does not sound like many creationists:

Darwin’s theory of evolution by chance mutation and survival of the fittest has proven hopelessly inadequate to account for a great many observations in biology . . . .

Darwin insisted that evolution happened very gradually. Steven Jay Gould, a Harvard biologist and geologist, notes that on the eve of the publication of The Origin of Species, T.H. Huxley wrote Darwin, promising to battle on his behalf but warning that he had burdened his argument unnecessarily by this insistence. Darwin’s portrayal of glacially slow evolution reflected in part his admiration of Charles Lyell, who promoted the idea of gradualism in geology . . . .

And just as Lyell rejected the evidence for cataclysm in geology, Darwin ignored problems in his own evidence . . . Change only seemed abrupt.

Darwin’s biggest problem was lack of evidence for his theory:

But to this day fossil evidence has not turned up the necessary missing links. Gould called the extreme rarity in the fossil record of transitional forms of life “the trade secret of paleontology.” Younger scientists, confronted by the continuing absence of such missing links, are increasingly skeptical of the old theory (p. 158).

Ferguson goes on to quote Niles Eldridge of the American Museum of Natural History: “The old explanation that the fossil record was inadequate is in itself an inadequate explanation.” Amen!

Steven Jay Gould (and others) have hit upon another idea, since the old one did not fit the facts. Evolution evolves! Gould says that a new species arose suddenly in the geologic record showing that it did not evolve by steady change, but instead changed all at once and was fully formed. The new paradigm of thought attributed this evolution by periodic leaps and bounds to two features: “(1) It requires a mechanism for biological change more powerful than chance mutation . . .” (p. 159). This is necessary because most mutants are not only inferior because of their mutation, but they are also sterile, incapable of passing on any changes (good or bad) that they might have developed. I find the phrase, “more powerful than chance mutation” enlightening in view of the creation model of origins.

The second feature: “. . . it opens us up to the possibility of rapid evolution in our own time . . .” (p. 159). This feature would abet the “conspiracy” to bring about all the changes suggested in the other sections of the book. One problem, though, is the Law of Entropy. The author, Ferguson, even admits this problem.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics, or the Law of Entropy, has been advanced by many creationists against the theory of evolution. The argument goes something like this:

The Second Law of Thermodynamics, the Law of Entropy, suggests that the things which we see ordered about us are running down – approaching a state of randomness, not order. The riddle of evolution is how can living things evolve (reach a state of order) in a world that is supposed to be running down?

The humanities teachers, biologists, paleontologists and others who face this argument usually hem and haw around and finally affirm their faith in evolution and the ability of the world to improve upon itself by chance mutations and natural selection. It does not satisfy the creationist, and now it is not satisfying the evolutionists though they still cling to evolution.

What happens? Evolution evolves again. First, because the geologic record did not give the right evidence, evolution evolved from being a slow, constant theory, to a cataclysmic, no-missing-link theory. To answer the question of how there is an ordering process in a system of chaos, a system of syntropy has been developed.

Syntropy (ordering) is the opposite of entropy (randomness). Biochemist (and Nobel laureate) Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, the discoverer of Vitamin C, “proposed that a drive toward greater order may be a fundamental principle of nature . . . . He rejected the idea that random mutations account for the sophistication in living matter. Biological reactions are chain reactions, and the molecules fit together more precisely than the cogwheels of a Swiss watch. How, then, could they have developed by accident?” (Ferguson, p. 161).

In 1977 a Nobel prize was offered for a “new explanation for rapid evolution – biological, cultural, personal” (p. 163): dissipative structures, a theory by a Belgian physical chemist named Illya Prigogine. The theory another evolution in the theory of evolution – supposedly offers the explanation of how living things evolve uphill in a world that is running downhill. Dissipative structures are maintained by a continuous dissipation (consumption) of energy. This theory seems to violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics (explained above) and even Prigogine “has pointed out that the theory `violates the law of large numbers”‘ (p. 166). This theory only bolsters the concept of humanism: The denial of the existence of God and that all nature must rely on the highest form of nature, the human, for any kind of social redemption. It might seem to the humanists that anyone who begins to answer the creationists’ arguments from science (as well as Scripture) deserves a Nobel prize.

The new developments in the evolution theory point out the inadequacies of the old view of natural selection and mutation. There are inadequacies, though in the new theories as well, even though they may seem to explain some old problems. Until the question of the origins of the universe and life (Where did it come from? and How did it start?) are resolved by believing the Bible, evolution will keep on evolving from theory to theory.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 39, pp. 625, 635
October 2, 1980

By Dan Walters

Anyone who claims to be a Christian but who denies a clear and fundamental doctrine of the Bible such as the divinity of Christ, the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, or the existence of heaven and hell may be described as a modernist: In recent surveys among denominationalists with modernistic tendencies, it is significant that a greater number of persons always deny the existence of hell than the number who deny the existence of heaven. I have never known of any undenominational Christian who doubted an eternal reward for the saved, but I have known several who have denied eternal punishment for the lost. This seems to indicate that “the wish is father to the thought.” Hell seems unfair to our finite minds, and so we rationalize it away.

The New Testament says as much or more about hell than it says about heaven. One of the best descriptions of hell as a continuing torment is found in the account of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk. 16:19-31). The rich man is pictured as being fully conscious in hell and “being tormented in this flame.” The New Testament does not say that this is a parable, but assuming that it is a parable, why would it teach an untruth? Every other parable of Christ concerns things that could have literally taken place, whether they actually did or not. Christ never made use of Greek mythology or other fictional material of this sort in His teaching.

In Matthew 25:46, Jesus said, “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” “Everlasting” and “eternal” are from the same Greek word. If we know how long heaven will last, we then know how long the torment of the wicked will last. Yet no one seems to be interested in finding arguments to limit the reward of the righteous.

Those who deny eternal punishment argue that hell will be annihilation; the wicked will simply be burned up. Yet the Bible teaches that hell was prepared for the Devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41) and that the Devil will “be tormented day and night for ever and ever” (Rev. 20:10). The Devil is an angel, a spirit being, .and there is no evidence that such a being is capable of being burned up. But then it is argued that man, being mortal, will be burned up while the Devil will continue to be tormented. The punishment of wicked humans is described in Romans 2:9 as “tribulation and anguish.” The state of the rich man could be described as “tribulation and anguish,” but annihilation contains neither tribulation nor anguish.

Some count on the statement in 2 Thessalonians 1:9 that the wicked will “be punished with everlasting destruction.” Does this mean that they will cease to exist? Job, while still alive and in the midst of his sufferings, said, “He hath destroyed me on every side, and I am gone” (Job 19:10). Job was destroyed but still conscious and in anguish. The Bible says that death is the punishment for sin, and it is assumed that the second death will be annihilation of the spirit as well as the body. Paul says that the Ephesians, before conversion, were “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1). Neither their spirits nor their bodies had ceased to exist; they were spiritually dead, separated from God. Those in hell will be separated from God for all eternity, yet they will continue to exist, as did the Ephesians.

Is annihilation a punishment sufficient to be called “torment,” “tribulation and anguish,” and “weeping and gnashing of teeth”? Is it a punishment which men fear to the extent that it will motivate them to turn from their wicked ways? There are millions of atheists in the world, and they all expect to be annihilated when they die. Yet they do not seem to fear death more than others. All of the animals are annihilated when they die, yet we do not think of them as deserving a horrible punishment. Hebrews 10:29 says that those who despise Christ shall be given a “sorer punishment” than those who despised Moses’ law. Those who despised Moses’ law were stoned to death; according to those who view man’s soul as mortal, they were annihilated. How will a second annihilation be “sorer” than a first annihilation? In fact, if such were true there would be no purpose in the resurrection. Why resurrect a man who has already been annihilated in order to annihilate him again? It might be supposed that burning to death would be greater punishment than dying a natural death, but it must be remembered that many persons have already burned to death here on earth, some have died slowly of horrible diseases, and some have been tortured to death. Why bother to raise them if they are to be annihilated? Their punishment will be no greater than that of an unfortunate dog who burns to death in a house fire.

We know that God is a God of justice, and that punishment will be in proportion to crime. Jesus said, “that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes” (Lk. 12:47, 48). Though we are given little information on the subject, this principle seems to indicate that there will be degrees of punishment. Let those whose sense of justice is outraged by the very existence of hell think about the consequence of their own theory: that Hitler, Stalin, and Charles Manson must receive exactly the same punishment as a good moral man who never heard the gospel; all will be annihilated.

One emotional argument says that God can not torture anyone, that such would be out of character. If this is true, then He cannot torture the Devil and his angels. Why would it be so much worse to torture a human than to torture a spirit being of a higher level than man? If God can not torture anyone, how did He bring Himself to cause King Uzziah to be smitten with leprosy and King Herod to be eaten alive by worms? This torture was of a shorter duration, but it was not instantaneous by any means. If God is not capable of torture, then He is not capable of it for any length of time, even for the short time necessary for bodies to burn up in the lake of fire.

Another popular argument says that if hell is eternal torment, then Jesus did not really atone for us upon the cross, since He only died and did not suffer eternal torment. If we take the position that what Jesus did had to be equal in all respects to the punishment man would have had to bear without -Him, then it could be argued that Jesus would have had to die millions of deaths, since he atoned for millions of people. How can one death atone for millions? Also, we know that Jesus was not annihilated, since He promised the thief that he would be with Him in paradise. If Jesus was not annihilated, but men are to be annihilated, then the punishment is not equal. Actually the punishment did not have to be equal, since Christ was not equal to men. He was the Son of God. The value of His blood is not to be compared to the value of a man’s blood.

Other arguments can be made, but none can stand before the plain language of Scripture. The arguments fall into two categories: (1) those which assume that man is wholly mortal, and (2) those which rely on human wisdom and emotion. Instead of wasting time and effort to prove that hell does not exist, why not concentrate on avoiding any kind of punishment and inheriting eternal life? Otherwise, if it turns out that hell does exist, you will go there and regret your mistake throughout eternity.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 38, pp. 618-619 
September 25, 1980