John Eldredge's Dangerous Theology Part 3
The Prayer of Intervention and Listening Prayer
In parts one and two of my critique of John Eldredge’s book Moving Mountains: Praying with Passion, Confidence, and Authority, I discussed how Eldredge misuses, misinterprets, and misapplies the Bible and his many assertions and claims. This week, a look at how Eldredge believes we should be praying.
Eldredge promotes five types of prayer: the Prayer of Intervention, Daily Prayer, Listening Prayer, Praying Scripture, and Warfare Prayer. This post will look at the Prayer of Intervention and Listening Prayer as two of the most burdensome ideas to place on a believer.
I do not want to give this advice, but if you want to see how far Eldredge goes with the ideas below, I suggest you read the book yourself. Space does not allow me to go paragraph by paragraph pointing out how Eldredge hijacks the Scriptures and creates his forms of prayer. I pray that by exposing this kind of teaching, you will have an easier time recognizing these issues in other teachers and authors.
The Prayer of Intervention
Eldredge begins chapter six with the story of Peter in prison, found in Acts 12. Eldredge focuses on the people praying and assumes Luke added this detail “for our benefit” (75). No doubt, it is important to pray for those in prison, especially when they have been arrested for sharing the Gospel. However, that is not what Eldredge hones in on. He shines his light of eisegesis on the prayer, making it the subject.
He notes that verse 5 the New Living Translation says, “…the church prayed very earnestly for him [Peter].” Eldredge claims that because Luke added this to the story it “clearly illustrates the Prayer of Intervention” (75). I would argue it is not clear. What is clear is that God rescued Peter and the believers were surprised he got out! If we approach every text to learn some prescriptive way of living, we end up making the text man-centered and miss the story's true meaning. Eldredge is doing this here. This story is not about prayer, though prayer was a part of the story. It is most certainly not a proof text about intervening prayer. Alas, Eldredge would want you to believe it is so.
We continue.
Eldredge points out the Greek word for “very earnestly” and shows that it is the same word used to describe how Jesus prayed in the garden. He notes that Eugene Peterson used the words “most strenuously” in his translation of The Message. This means nothing more that they were all praying earnestly. It is rather cut and dry. While we cannot doubt the church was praying like mad for Peter, it is not the same as being sure “they were calling upon all the resources of heaven for Peter’s release” (77). We do not know what they were praying for. We also can not say “they were calling on the angels of God to come and help” (77). Eldredge is reading into the text what is not there, building a case on it, and expecting you to believe it.
To strengthen his case, he argues that those praying for Peter were not approaching God with simple petitionary prayers and a “few quick ‘Our Father’s” (79). He assumes they were repeatedly intervening and invoking on behalf of Peter and that they “clearly didn’t believe one simple prayer would do it…”. Eldredge’s filling-the-gaps-of-scripture approach sets up his argument for what he calls (with proper name capitalization) the Prayer of Intervention.
Eldredge lays on the heavy burden of repetitive prayer to produce an effect but adds to the burden by asserting that we must calm down, fix our eyes on Jesus, and “tune in” so we can align with God as his partners.
This is found nowhere in the Bible.
He assumes the Bible teaches that we are enforcers of the Kingdom and we are “partnering with him [God] in bringing his kingdom to bear on the need at hand” (81). He argues that “quick prayers often don’t work; simple, little prayers aren’t sufficient to the needs of the world” (82). How does he know this? This sounds like he believes our prayers have some kind of mystical power or force built into them. Nothing in the Bible indicates that a short prayer, or its seeming simplicity, would be ineffective in petitioning the Lord to move on behalf of our needs.
Eldredge even teaches that the more people involved, the more effective and slips in his theology he calls “agreements”. (More on this next week). Eldredge assumes we can make mystical and powerful agreements with truth and/or lies. It is as though they are some sort of force we need to keep attached to if good or break off of our minds and souls if bad. This concept lends itself to the New Age ideas around the Law of Attraction. It’s nonsense.
There is no room to discuss how he abuses the text of Matthew 16, or how he writes a prayer that he thinks may have sounded like what the believers prayed in Mary’s home for Peter. He claims there is no doubt they prayed similarly to his written prayer “proclaiming the truth, invoking the kingdom, enforcing the kingdom… just as the psalms taught them to do — just as Jesus taught them to do” (86). Since he believes this, he also believes we have the power to tell the elements of this world what to do, just as his friends did as they prayed against the fire headed to his house. He said they brought the kingdom of God over his property, “enforcing and commanding with authority that the fire ‘stand down…” forbidding it to cross the property line (88). I feel bad for his neighbors who didn’t get the same protection.
I live in Oklahoma and I have yet to hear one story about any Christian who has moved an EF5 tornado away from anyone in its path. When a tornado hits, it goes where it pleases and they have hit many believers’ homes.
Finally, I am appalled by Eldredge’s statement that God “has given us power and authority to change the course of events ourselves” (89). He has? Then why do bad things keep happening? What if all the enforcing, invoking, and declaring doesn’t work? What then? Do I blame our friends whose daughter died from cancer? Did they not enforce or invoke enough to change the course of those dreadful events? Did the believers of God who wept on our knees for her life simply misunderstand prayer? Were we so weak, and our chaos so wild that we could not enforce the kingdom down on earth and could not hear from God?
We must logically take these ideas to their ultimate and multifaceted conclusions. The damage caused by this kind of teaching could be as vast as what is left in a tornado’s path. I cannot stand for such a damaging and dangerous theology. Neither should you.
Listening Prayer
The second teaching on prayer is called “Listening Prayer”. This type of prayer led me down a terrible path. Read my post about talking to a false Jesus.
Eldredge’s opening story of a friend who needed healing pulls at the heartstrings. Everyone wants healing and it is something we should be praying for. This cannot be argued. But this is not the focus of Eldredge’s chapter. By the third paragraph, Eldredge writes that to understand what might really be going on with his friend, he asked Jesus a question and Jesus responded. You will see how Jesus becomes the therapy guide through this prayer meeting. (It is important to know that John Eldredge is a licensed counselor.)
To Eldredge’s question concerning what is going on in his friend’s life with all his sickness, Jesus answers, “Ask him how he feels about his body” (137). I ask you, dear reader, does this sound like Jesus? Did Jesus ever go through this kind of therapy with someone he encountered? Did Paul or Peter practice this? Does James cover this in his teaching about prayer? Does John record this kind of practice?
The closest thing I can find is when Jesus asked the man at the Pool of Bethesda, “Do you want to be healed?” in John 5:8. Two things of note: 1. this was a real story of a real man in front of the physical Jesus and they were having a conversation. 2. The story is it is not about us. That story is about the Son of God encountering a man. It is about the Messiah, not us. We learn about Jesus in that story and Jesus alone. A dreadful mistake to make with the Bible is to confuse and conflate to make every story about us.
According to Eldredge, for healing to come to his friend (because asking Jesus is not good enough), he first needed to “break those agreement with self-hatred, specifically hatred of his body, and all the judgments he was bringing against himself. Having done that, we were able to resume prayer and soon he was feeling well again” (138). I’m sorry, what now? If Eldredge could just point me to one place in Scripture where this is practiced I might agree with him. But, he cannot.
He says that the most significant thing he has done in his prayer life is to ask Jesus what to pray. This is not so that he can gain wisdom and insight as prayed for by Paul in Ephesians 1:15-18 and Galatians 1:9-14. Eldredge asks Jesus direct questions to find out from Jesus what to pray for and do next. He builds this argument from the stories of Elijah and Ananias teaching that in the same way they heard from God and knew his will, we too can hear from God directly, all the time, and know what to do. He goes as far as to claim that “God does not torment us by hiding his will from us, though at times it does take a little effort to discern it” (139). Eldredge forgot about Paul’s words in Romans 12:2, “Do not be conformed to the pattern of this world but be transformed by the renewing of your mind that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” Paul does not say we ask Jesus questions so He can therapeutically walk us through our issues or answer every question we toss His way.
On page 141, Eldrege continues using Ananias as the example we should follow. We should be in such intimacy with Jesus that we can ask Him a question about what to pray or what to do and He will answer. Never mind the fact Jesus never taught anyone to do that. Eldredge writes that he understands that “prayer speeches are what most of us have seen modeled, but there is a fabulous intimacy and effectiveness available to us as we pause and let God say something in return” (141). This is hardly what Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount, but clearly, Eldredge knows what works best.
You can go ahead and skip page 142 when he misuses and misinterprets John 10 about Jesus and those sheep who “hear” his voice. Nonsense.
He then chastises anyone who believes God only speaks to us from the Bible and reminds his reader that God spoke to many people in the Bible. Eldredge fails to read his own Bible because anyone in the Bible who heard God did not struggle to make sure they were hearing from God nor did it “at times take a little effort to discern it.” When God spoke in the Bible, people heard Him loud and clear. He doubles down on this when he writes, “Over and over again, the Scriptures provide doctrine and example that we are meant to hear God’s voice…” (143). Maybe so, but not in the way Eldredge proposes.
What happens next in this book is so bizarre and outside of the Biblical teachings it is astounding. I used to do this, and once I realized what I was messing with, I repented on the spot.
Eldredge says it takes time to discern the voice of God and we should start by asking questions. (Not unlike sitting at an Ouija board, if you ask me.) He proposes you do not start with “huge and desperate questions” but rather easy ones, “Do you want us to have dinner with the neighbors?” (145). He likens hearing from God to learning to play Mozart, implying it takes time and practice. Again, Eldredge misuses and misapplies the Bible on page 145 when he teaches about Elijah hearing a “gentle whisper” as though this is a proof text on hearing from God. It’s not. Go read it. And, if we are to get good at hearing from God we must quiet ourselves and settle down. Seems to me he could go ahead and answer that question about dinner with his neighbors. Do we not have brains that can make good and rational decisions?
Yes, have dinner with your neighbors.
He clarifies that he is “not listening for an audible voice” but that he is listening for “his gentle voice within for that is where Jesus dwells — within our very hearts” (146). Yeah, no way anyone could get that wrong.
The Quija board approach continues. Eldredge teaches that there are basic steps: Start with small and simple questions, yes or no, if possible. Repeat the question as you pray and listen - that helps “dial you in and keeps you focused” (146). Then, if you can’t hear God’s voice, Eldredge says you can “try on” an answer (146). He might add to his prayer, “Are you saying yes, Jesus?” Are you saying you want us to go?” (147). Eldredge never teaches wisdom, insight, depth of knowledge, reason, or the ability to think. It is as though the Spirit of God can only act on and in a person if we’re asking the right questions. Can we not read the Scripture and gain insight into the will of God? Can we not talk to one another and gain good counsel? Can we not take the time to petition God and see what happens? Are we not blessed with intelligence and critical thinking skills? Of course, there are things in life we wish God would just come down and give us a sign or tell us outright. It simply does not happen that way.
Eldredge claims God will speak in a “small, inner voice” (abused Biblical text) and you should start seeing results by implementing his exhausting plan of quiet, repetitive questions, “consecration” and waiting to hear something inside somewhere.
Dear Believer, this is one of the most dangerous things I have ever been involved in. When I was practicing listening prayer my life was always in chaos. I was never good enough. The voice always wanted me to dig deeper into my past, my childhood, and my memories. There was always some sort of faith crisis I needed to identify and something else I needed to fix. I could never find all the things wrong with me or all the agreements I needed to break. For every agreement I felt I had made with the past, another person, a lie of the enemy, and “broke”, there was another on its heels.1
I want to assure you, dear reader, that I am all for good, therapeutic, Godly counseling when needed. God has given people in that field the insight and intelligence to help us walk through our most difficult issues. This is not what Eldredge is proposing. What Eldrege is proposing goes beyond and outside the Bible. It moves into mysticism and subjective experiences, opening one up to all sorts of “voices” while making no assurances as to how one knows they are hearing from God. (In this post, I talk about our ability to hear voices at any time.)
These two prayer types, and the three others I did not cover, should wave you far and away from John Eldredge.
Next week I will post my concerns about Eldredge’s ideas around declaring, proclaiming, and invoking the Kingdom of God.
For an even more in-depth look at what Eldredge teaches in this area, see his book Waking the Dead: the Glory of a Heart Fully Alive. Here he talks in more detail about how to let Jesus walk you back to your memories for complete healing and deep restoration. It is beyond unbiblical. There we can “invite Christ in” because Jesus will never force himself on us. There we can ask him to come into the emotion or memory as we give him access (141). He also explains “agreements” in the chapter on Spiritual Warfare. He asserts that “when we make those agreements with the demonic forces suggesting things to us, we come under their influence… sort of like a contract” (154). Made up nonsense. Yes, we can think terrible things about ourselves, but what we need is the truth of God and His word, not some warfare against so-called agreements. Eldredge misuses the Bible many times over to make it seem as though all of this is biblical. What is more, all of this is never enough. Read with caution… and a red pen of fury.