'Latter Rain' Heretics

The Delusions of David Eells - 14

Eells' 'Disclaimer'!

(Continued from page 238)

Eells attempts to excuse himself from responsibility for any material on his site which may lead to valid criticism in another typically ignorant article found at:

Eells: 'It shouldn't need to be said that because God's book quotes Satan, it doesn't mean that He agrees with his thinking or actions on everything.  A few, thinking to glorify themselves, have criticized me for quoting certain Christians with whom I do not even agree on other issues.  These hypocrites do not apply this same rule to themselves when they quote the national news or other lost or confused sources.  For instance, I found the book "The Bible Code" to be a source of true information, even though that information is sometimes misinterpreted and even though the writer does not believe in the God Who encoded His own Word.'

TCE: Eells displays all the logic of the Proverbial 'fool' (Proverbs 17v27-28) for the Bible obviously describes the works of Satan and the truth about him sufficient that only a fool would be deceived by the nature of this arch-enemy.  The question to be asked is - 'Does Eells throughly Biblically critique these 'certain Christians with whom I do not even agree on other issues.' Does he discuss sufficiently where these 'Christians' err seriously enough to warrant public warnings?  We have discussed the truth and the false issues regarding these deceptions clearly at:  Section 72

Can you imagine Jesus or the apostles taking this stance of Eells' (try to find a Biblical precedent while noting the way Paul was inspired to phrase his instruction on marriage in 1 Corinthians 7!):

'I offer to you information here and it is your job to discern it.  I should not be judged for what I have NOT said but what I have said.'

Does he really not appreciate that we will also be judged on what we allow others in our ministry  or fellowship to say or do?  (Revelation 2-3!) 

What does
Eells accuse others of: 'In every case these people have disobeyed our Lord's commands to their own judgment. {1 Tim.5:19} Against an elder receive not an accusation, except at [the mouth of] two or three witnesses.  We are to receive no accusation unless we have two or three reputable witnesses who SAW the elder commit sin.'

Again, our thorough refutation of this false idea (
Section 72) demolishes his pretensions!

Eells' blundering examples totally fail to hold water: 'This is not hearsay found on the Internet or books for which Peter would be condemned for being the first pope; Jesus would be found guilty for being a homosexual winebibber Who faked His own death.  According to these people we would be wrong for quoting such people.'

He continues in this nonsensical vein:

'We would be guilty by association as the Pharisees did to Jesus, saying that He sinned because He ate with publicans and sinners or was touched by one who had been a harlot, even though Jesus did not agree with any of the sins and was not guilty of them Himself. The modern Pharisees still do this.  If they disagree with you on any subject, they search your site to see who they can dig up dirt on and then apply that dirt to the righteous. These are wicked people in every case.  Disagreeing with the Pharisees is not a sin.'

Truly laughable that he can turn and launch
ad hominem attacks on anyone who dare Biblically critique his work!

Eells then misuses Scripture in this manner:

Our Lord commanded us to not judge one another over differences of doctrine.  {Rom.14:1} But him that is weak in faith receive ye, [yet] not for decision of scruples. {2} One man hath faith to eat all things: but he that is weak eateth herbs. {3} Let not him that eateth set at nought him that eateth not; and let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. {4} Who art thou that judgest the servant of another? to his own lord he standeth or falleth.  Yea, he shall be made to stand; for the Lord hath power to make him stand. … 10} But thou, why dost thou judge thy brother? or thou again, why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of God.  One thing Pharisees don't do is apply the scriptures to themselves; they are always for someone else.'

Where, in this passage on 'principles of conscience related to the Word of God,' does Paul even mention doctrine!?

It makes us wonder if Eells has ever carefully read the whole of the Book of Romans (he clearly uses the Rick Warren
eisegesis method of searching for a verse that appears to support the doctrine he wants to teach!) for he misquotes this passage and then, only two chapters later, fails to read (Romans 16v17-18) in context:

17   Now
I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 18  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

As Christians, striving always to be faithful to the Word of God, we have '
marked' Eells and warn all to 'avoid' him and his false doctrines and teachings! 

Cf.  1 Timothy 1

3  As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may
charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, 4  nor to occupy themselves with myths and endless genealogies which promote speculations rather than the divine training that is in faith;

(Also ref. 1 Timothy 6
v3; Matt 7v15-23; Philippians 3v17-19; Col 2v4; 2 Peter 2v3)

How can Eells miss the thrust of the passage he thinks supports his false views when this clear conclusion is brought by the Holy Spirit?:

Romans 14
v16ff.: '16  Let not then your good be evil spoken of: 17  For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. 18  For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. 19  Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.

Eells prattles on:

'According to these self-righteous people,
if anyone ever did anything wrong in their life, we can't quote them or we are guilty of their sin.  Nevermind that this person may have repented long ago or was only guilty by Internet lies.'

In every instance where doctrinal error was damaging our Christian witness (e.g. see Case Histories
I & II) it was this factor that led to Biblical critique in public and via this website - not personal sin!  Eells is wrong on so many things that we do wonder if he has ever been right about criticism in any form.  He is probably also as guilty as many in the contemporary church of allowing serious sin, particularly among church leaders, to go unchecked and without seriously proven repentance before reinstatement is allowed.  We are not alone in believing that leaders  who sin seriously in important matters of doctrine and behaviour should never be allowed to return to positions of authority - particularly in doctrinal matters and teaching.  Doubtlessly, Eells would join other spineless heretics exposed on this site and likewise dismiss the glaring Scriptural example of punishment over the matter of theft and lying to God in New Testament times (Acts 5v1ff.):

1  But a man named Ananias with his wife Sapphira sold a piece of property,2  and with his wife's knowledge he kept back some of the proceeds, and brought only a part and laid it at the apostles' feet. 3  But Peter said, "Ananias,
why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land? 4  While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God." 5  When Ananias heard these words, he fell down and died. And great fear came upon all who heard of it. 6  The young men rose and wrapped him up and carried him out and buried him. 7  After an interval of about three hours his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8  And Peter said to her, "Tell me whether you sold the land for so much." And she said, "Yes, for so much." 9  But Peter said to her, "How is it that you have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Hark, the feet of those that have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out." 10  Immediately she fell down at his feet and died. When the young men came in they found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11  And great fear came upon the whole church, and upon all who heard of these things.

Note carefully - no human caused the deaths of these two -
they were correctly challenged by Peter and God chose to slay them!

Why is there no comparable fear of God in the church today?  Because of false interpretations by men like Eells!  Benny Hinn's desire for a 'holy spirit machine gun' is an example of a false teacher
wanting to cause the deaths of those who expose his deceptions - how very different from the real working of God, for He alone has Absolute Dominion and Sovereignty over the affairs of men.

Eells gives these pointless examples that he thinks support his case:

'In one case a woman was attacked by her contemporaries because she was a prophetess living among non-full gospel people, like Jesus and the disciples among the Pharisees, and was assailed by these apostates as a witch by association.  If we can't quote anyone who has done wrong
you Pharisees had better rip the Psalms of David out of your Bible.  He was at one time an adulterer and murderer whom God decided to give us scriptures through.  You Pharisees better rip Proverbs out, too.  Solomon fell away from The Lord because of his riches and all his heathen wives and never came back to The Lord. Tear Moses out because he didn't honor God when he smote the rock and so wasn't allowed into the Promised Land.'

TCE: first he gives us no clues concerning this 'prophetess.'  Was she 100% accurate in her 'prophecies' as Scripture demands (Deuteronomy 18v20-22; Jeremiah 23; Matthew 7v15-23) - or was she 'prophesying in part' (i.e. with a 'Rick Joyner' type prophesy 'score') as un-Scripturally accepted by Eells?  And, again, wrong behaviour is not the only Scriptural rider in judging any ministry - so bringing in the behaviour of Old Testament saints to try and support doctrinally and prophetically inaccurate ministries simply does not wash!

Eells cannot help but begin boasting:

By the way, I have served the Lord faithfully for over three decades by His grace and done none of the immorality of these brethren, and yet these Pharisees assail me.'

TCE: how did Jesus warn us?

Luke 18
v9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: 10 "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: `God, I thank you that I am not like other men - robbers, evildoers, adulterers - or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.'  18:13 "But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, `God, have mercy on me, a sinner.'  14 "I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."

As we have seen,
Eells' definition of 'faithfully' certainly doesn't square with carefully seeking after total faithfulness to the Word of God - which is crucial to any ministry.  We are clearly instructed (see previous) that we are to judge doctrine and teachings, particularly very public ministries such as Eells that could reach millions on the internet.

Eells: ' Of course we have a perfect numeric pattern in these men's writings showing that only God wrote them.'

TCE: Again, he turns to his definitions - which we have shown are easily debunked - to define the inspiration of the Word.  There is even a strong clue to at least one reason for his Scriptural blindness - he quotes 'numerics' instead 'faithfulness to the Word'.  If God had wanted us to use  'numerics' as the standard for His Word He would have used a clear numerical system throughout instead of the clearly written Word in the Biblical languages He carefully chose - which is why the emphasis is always on His Word and not some subjective 'Numerical Gnosis' (Acts 17v11):

'These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that
they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.'

The Bereans did not turn to 'numerics' but to the written Word!  No doubt Eells,
et al, would argue that 'searching the Scriptures' means searching for 'numerics' too, but they have only the Biblical 'evidence' of total silence of facts to support such a view!  'Numerics' is a very recent addition to theological debate and we never read of Biblical saints searching for such support! 'Numerics' has such a thorough smack of Gnosticism about it that we should hardly be surprised to find it lacking in the support that Eells insists it carries (also see page):

(Cf. Acts 20
v32; Romans 10v17; 2 Corinthians 2v17; 2 Corinthians 4v2; 2 Corinthians 13; Ephesians 5v26; Colossians 3v16; 1 Thessalonians  2v13; 2 Thessalonians  2v15; 2 Timothy 2v15; 4v2; Titus 1v9; Hebrews 4v12; 1 Peter 1v23-25; 1 John 2v7; Revelation 3v8)

Eells: 'God is big enough that He can use imperfect people to write perfect scriptures.  My concern is that the scriptures are right, not that these men were always right.  And so it is with people we quote - the teaching, prophecy or dream should have some redeeming value even if they prophesy in part.'

TCE: orthodox Christians have no problem believing God uses 'imperfect people' by inspiration - as Scripture testifies (2 Timothy 3v16:  All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness), but Eells promotion of fanciful, un-Scriptural and seriously heretical 'teaching, prophecy or dream[s]' to give 'some redeeming value even if they prophesy in part' is a foolish stretch that is immensely dangerous!

Notice how Eells is not shy in using vitriolic language and lack of genuine Scriptural support to put the boot into Christians who seek to correct his ministry:

'These "perverted" people seek only
to draw aside disciples after themselves by assaulting others, making themselves big at another's expense. This is the spirit of "faction" and is behind denominationalism.'  The Greek word for faction is "Erithia" which means seeking to separate followers through selfish ambition.  The root word is "Erithos," meaning a hireling.  They are bought out by their lusts and jealousy to do evil.  {Jas.3:13} Who is wise and understanding among you? let him show by his good life his works in meekness of wisdom. {14} But if ye have bitter jealousy and faction in your heart, glory not and lie not against the truth. {15} This wisdom is not [a wisdom] that cometh down from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. {16} For where jealousy and faction are, there is confusion and every vile deed.  {Tit.3:10} A factious man after a first and second admonition refuse; {11} knowing that such a one is perverted, and sinneth, being self-condemned.  This is clear that we are to separate from factious people, not those at whom they rail. {Rom.16:17} Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them. {18} For they that are such serve not our Lord Christ, but their own belly; and by their smooth and fair speech they beguile the hearts of the innocent.'

TCE: we have thoroughly examined and exposed common false views concerning 'heretics,' 'factious people,' and the misuse of Matthew 18v15ff. on another page:

50.  Beware - make judgements based solely on the whole canon of Scripture
51. Beware those who refuse to accept expert definitions but follow cultic methods in using their own definitions!

and on
this page (ibid.):

72.  Beware those who try to make false doctrine a private matter - when Scripture makes it clear that it is always to be dealt with publicly

Note, first, that Eells completely reverses the Scriptural result that comes from those who are 'erithia' (factious/cause factions).  He gives the correct meaning of the word and claims '
the spirit of "faction" ... is behind denominationalism.

Greek expert, W.E. Vine, interprets the Greek word,
erithia, to denote "ambition, self-seeking, rivalry," self-will being an underlying idea in the word; hence it denotes "party-making." It is derived, not from eris, "strife," but from erithos, "a hireling"; hence the meaning of "seeking to win followers," "factions," so rendered in the RV of 2 Cor. 12:20, KJV, "strifes"; not improbably the meaning here is rivalries, or base ambitions (all the other words in the list express abstract ideas rather than factions); Gal. 5:20 (ditto); Phil. 1:17 (RV; KJV, v. 16, "contention"); 2:3 (KJV, "strife"); Jas. 3:14, 16 (ditto); in Rom. 2:8 it is translated as an adjective, "factious" (KJV, "contentious"). The order "strife, jealousy, wrath, faction," is the same in 2 Cor. 12:20 and Gal. 5:20. "Faction" is the fruit of jealousy. Cf. the synonymous adjective hairetikos, Titus 3:10, causing division (marg., "factious"), not necessarily "heretical," in the sense of holding false doctrine.

However, Eells, having earlier neglected the clear thrust of Romans 16
v17-18, also ignores verses that absolutely support the consistent principle of the Old and New Testament to 'be ye separate, saith the Lord':

2 Corinthians 6
v17:  Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you' (cf.  Isa.  52v11; Ezekiel 20v34, 41; Revelation 18v4)

If you are confronted by 'factious' brethren, whether 'schismatic' or 'heretical' - meaning they seek followers, are bringing false doctrine, or both (and they are surely always found together - as wrong doctrine inevitably leads to wrong behaviour!) - you are to  confront them if possible, whether Matthew 18
v15ff. applies to a personal sin situation between two or more, or false teaching applies (whether in a single fellowship or more publicly).  As we wrote in Section 72 (above) regarding one heretic:

'In today's flabby Christian environment it is difficult to get Christians to any meeting - even the Sunday services - so how could we oppose Wheelhouse to his face except by goading his followers out by making much of the evidence against him clear in a letter.
Writing a letter to warn others of error is clearly 100% Scriptural as proven above. What did we do that was un-Scriptural? Why do the so-called leadership of Calvary Baptist Church and the Baptist Union have no answers to these facts? In these days of easy communication through the mass media, and through the tape ministry of churches such as Calvary Baptist Church, it is obvious that teaching will rapidly be spread far and wide - both good and bad! If we are denied access to equivalent media outlets the only method of public correction of false teaching is to write letters, tracts, books, or rely on the Internet to call the attention of the Body to errors that affect the whole of Christianity.'

Eells also forgets the clear admonition of Paul (1 Corinthians 11

18  For, in the first place, when you assemble as a church, I hear that there are divisions (
schisms - Gk. scisma, schisma) among you; and I partly believe it, 19  for there must be factions (heresies - Gk. airesiv, hairesis) among you in order that those who are genuine ('approved' - Gk. dokimov, dokimos) among you may be recognized.

This is in full agreement with Romans 16
v17-18 and, carefully examining every angle of such deception leads to another Scripture that Eells does quote (Titus 3v10):

'Warn a divisive (
heretical - Gk. airetikov, hairetikos) person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.'

Again, this verse refutes his claim that Christians should only separate over matters of 'morality'!

Eells eventually quotes the Scripture that so many think is a catch-all for every confrontational situation of sin between Christians in the church: 'If these people come to you to make you sin by accepting an accusation without witnesses, tell them to obey the word and go first "alone" to the one they accuse. {Mt.18:15} And if thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. {16} But if he hear [thee] not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established. {17} And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican.  These wicked people always skip the first two commands here and go to the third because they seek the glory of man and not God.  These commands of The Lord are to make sure no gossiper or factious person could destroy the peace of an assembly.  Another reason is that if a man had repented of evil or there were extenuating circumstances the accuser would find this out and not be found a gossiper by God.'

TCE: the opening part of verse 15 makes it crystal clear: 'And if thy brother sin against thee'.  This applies in cases of 'personal sin' between Christians!  It does not apply to public teaching, as we have explained.

Eells: 'We have even been assaulted by men who use nicknames and pseudonyms to hide their identity, like cockroaches hiding in the dark.  They know that if they in turn were searched out they would be found to be sinners.  {Ps.64:2} Hide me from the secret counsel of evil-doers, From the tumult of the workers of iniquity; {3} Who have whet their tongue like a sword, And have aimed their arrows, even bitter words, {4} That they may shoot in secret places at the perfect: Suddenly do they shoot at him, and fear not. {5} They encourage themselves in an evil purpose; They commune of laying snares privily; They say, Who will see them? {6} They search out iniquities; We have accomplished, [say they], a diligent search: And the inward thought and the heart of every one is deep. {7} But God will shoot at them; With an arrow suddenly shall they be wounded. {8} So they shall be made to stumble, their own tongue being against them: All that see them shall wag the head.  You will notice that these "evil doers" "diligently" "search out iniquities" in others like the Pharisees that they are but they like to hide their identities and their own sins in darkness.  In scriptures and even in carnal law the accused has a right to FACE his accusers and are commanded to "go, show him his fault between thee and him alone."

TCE:  Eells is correct that Christians do not hide in anonymity, or behind pseudonyms, when confronting sin of either personal or doctrinal nature (we have the prime example of Paul confronting Peter in Galatians 2):

11   But when Peter was come to Antioch,
I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 12  For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. 13  And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. 14  But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? 15  We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles ...'

However, Eells is not content with stopping at the Scriptural teaching, but adds foolish riders:  '
They know that if they in turn were searched out they would be found to be sinners ...  like the Pharisees that they are but they like to hide their identities and their own sins in darkness.'

It is obvious that we are all sinners and, unless we are guilty of hypocritical judgment (see earlier discussion and teaching on
this page) and challenge someone like Eells over his heresies when we are equally guilty of false teaching of any kind, Scripture never calls us to prove we are perfect and sinless (although we are called to 'be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect' : Matthew 5v48; cf. Php 3v12) before confronting error.  If we had to wait until we were utterly sinless before confronting error we would never challenge heretics!  This must surely be obvious, even to Eells?

Eells finishes with an attempted spiritual flourish: '
Those who seek their own will do not understand that it is also more helpful to light a candle than to pompously curse the darkness.'

Light a candle?  Pompously curse the darkness?  Did any of the detractors really 'curse the darkness'?  Has Eells proven this anywhere - not that we've seen?  Shouldn't he prove this somewhere before hurling accusations around - obviously 'Yes'?!

What more need be said - the man who brought us the 'Duck of Death' and assorted nonsense finishes with the same high standard of 'much ado about nothing'!

It speaks much for the paucity of teaching - and the propensity to gather for 'ear tickling' (2 Timothy 4
v3) - that  Eells has an estimated following of hundreds of thousands.  Why - when he so easily refuted?

We finish with a quote from R.A. Torrey (How To Succeed In the Christian Life, pp. 60-61):

'Nothing goes further to help one understand the Bible than the purpose to obey it....Nothing clears the mind like obedience; nothing darkens the mind like disobedience. To obey a truth you see prepares you to see other truths.  To disobey a truth you see darkens your mind to all truths.'

Since Eells has already sneered at every attempt to help him correct his errors, we do not hold out much hope that he would take notice of anything that we write; but Christians should pray for him until the Lord tells you not to!

Topics on David Eells:

Latter Rain Anointing?

Manifest Sons (Latter Rain)/Kingdom/Dominion Theology

'Rapture Delusion'

The Rapture

The Tribulation

The Second Coming of Jesus Christ

The Millenium

Is the Tribulation for You - and other pipe dreams?!

The Bible and Dream Interpretation

Pre-trib rapture … came into the Church in 1832!

The Church is now 'Israel'?!

Christian takeover of the United States and the world?


The dangers for all fellowships

Faulty Christology and Theology

Claiming 'Healing' and Rejecting Medical Treatment

Heavy Shepherding from the 'Little gods'

'Positive Confession'

Joel's Army - the 'new breed'!

Signs of the Man-child's Birth?

Connection to Modern Day Apostles

Dreams, Visions - and Visualization!

Eells and the '*Duck of Death!'

Man-child, Witnesses & Tribulation Timing

'Bible Code - 1'

'Bible Code - Part II'

Eells version (of repentance) compared with Nineveh


Eells' 'Disclaimer'!

Know the reality of eternity in heaven by believing on Jesus Christ as your Lord & Saviour!

Go to the following link to discover eternal life is
A Free Gift for You

Home Page   |   Expositor History   |   'Orthodox' Heretics   |   Other Religions   |   Cults  |   Occult   |   New Age Movement  |   Rome & Ecumenism