The Grace Proclamator

and Promulgator

"To testify the gospel of the grace of God." Acts 20:24


Vol. XIII, No. 2 February 1, 1997




By Wayne Camp

In the first article I introduced the readers to Promise Keepers, the "Christianized" sect of the New Age men’s movement. And, while the men’s movement is classified as New Age, it truly has its roots in ancient pagan rites of passage. It also has much that is derived from the stages of manhood taught in the mystical religions of the American Indians. These stages of manhood that are the heart and core of PKs are not found in the word of God. The word of God is twisted and formed to embrace them but a great deal of hocus-pocus is necessary to even come close to applying Scripture to these rites of passage. This latest tool of Satan that he is using on a grand scale is permeated with the leaven of paganism, psychobabble, radical Pentecostalism, shamanism, and ecumenism. True believers in Jesus Christ should abstain from any association with the movement.

"But," I hear someone protest, "Promise Keepers does some good!" Remember that Ahab seduced Jehoshaphat with the same deception. It was good for the safety of both Israel and Judah to get the border town of Ramoth-gilead out of the control of enemy. When Jehoshaphat returned home after that engagement and after the death of Ahab during the battle, God sent a prophet to him to rebuke him saying, "Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? Therefore is wrath upon thee from the Lord" (II Chron 19:2). Even in a good cause, God’s people need to avoid association with evil and those who are evil.

In this article I want us to take a look at yet another problem with Promise Keepers—their alliances. While the people I will discuss are not, to my knowledge, a part of the PKs movement, they are closely associated with them in various ways. Promise Keepers are aligned with such people as Robert Hicks, a psychologist and pastoral counselor, who is author of a book called The Masculine Journey: Understanding the Six Stages of Manhood. This book was published by Promise Keepers, NavPress, and Robert Hicks.

Another of their alliances is with pop-psychologist and Nazarene preacher, James Dobson. Dobson is part of the self-esteem movement that has seduced many Christians.

As has already been pointed out, the movement is very closely aligned with the radical and unscriptural Vineyard branch of Pentecostalism. The Pentecostal movement is unscriptural in itself, but the Vineyard branch is so radical that many Pentecostal’s condemn it.

Within the last couple of years especially, the PK movement has been forging an alliance with Roman Catholics. Bill McCartney is a former Roman Catholic.

There is also evidence that Promise Keepers will form some sort of alliance with the Mormon cult. In fact Mormons have stages of the human journey much like that advocated by Robert Hicks which is gathered from paganism and the shamanism of the American Indian.

These alliances alone are enough to make any true-to-the-Bible Christian question the wisdom of having anything to do with the PKs movement. In fact, the more I learn of the movement and its various associations and ramifications, the more I am convinced it is a very effective tool of deceit molded to fit Satan’s program of end-time deception.  


"ROBERT HICKS is Professor of Pastoral Theology at the Seminary of the East, Dresher, PA. He also serves as President of Life Counseling Services, a professional center for Christian Counseling located near Philadelphia. A frequent speaker on men’s issues, Dr. Hicks is the author of Uneasy Manhood, Returning Home, and Failure to Scream." (From the Dust Cover of his book, THE MASCULINE JOURNEY: The Six Stages of Manhood.) Since THE MASCULINE JOURNEY was published, Hicks has written at least one more book, MAN OF ALL PASSIONS.

Some who are in sympathy with the PKs are surprised when you tell them what is in The Masculine Journey (Hereafter I will usually designate this book with the initials, TMJ. Editor). In fact, I have shown certain parts of the book to some who sympathize with the movement and they are shocked at some of the content.

Some seek to deny that there exists an alliance between PKs and Robert Hicks. The coalition cannot be denied. On page 11 Hicks acknowledges the cooperation and assistance of PKs in the publication of TMJ. "Thanks goes to NavPress and the Promise Keepers for having a vision for this project. I greatly appreciate their commitment to men and the publishing of materials that relate directly to men’s issues." On page 203 Promise Keepers has its own statement and advertisement. "Promise Keepers wants to provide men’s materials (like this book) as well as seminars and the annual conference to emphasize the godly conviction, integrity, and action each of us needs."

There you have it. First, Hicks acknowledges the assistance of PKs in the publication of TMJ, then PKs acknowledge that they desire to provide men’s materials such as the book under question. There can be no doubt there exists an alliance between Hicks and PKs. If you add to this the fact that 50,000 copies were distributed free at the 1993 PKs rally in Boulder, Colorado, there can be no doubt of the association of the two. Again, add the fact that after ceasing to give the book away at their gatherings, they issued a seven page defense of it. On their Website they still have a brief defense of the book and blame the readers for any impressions of impropriety they find in the book.

In his book, Hicks quotes Robert Bly and Sam Keen favorably. They are New Age writers for the men’s movement. Robert Bly’s book, Iron John, is pornographic to say the least. So is Keen’s book, Fire in the Belly.

He also quotes Charles Darwin. In fact, just under the title of Chapter Two, Creational Male—Adam: The Noble Savage, these words from Charles Darwin appear, "Man with all his noble qualities still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin." He does not comment at that time. Hicks follows this caption from Darwin with a second from Anthony Storr, "Do Impulses toward sadistic cruelty lurk in the depths of every human psyche"?

Both these captions are consistent with Hicks’ idea that Adam was a noble savage. Such an idea does not come from Scripture. In the second paragraph of this chapter, Hicks says, "To cite Margaret Mead’s often-used term for the uncivilized people groups she studied, we as men (and all humankind) are noble savages."

I now desire to show you some of the absurd and sometimes blasphemous positions taken by Robert Hicks in TMJ. Before you read the next few paragraphs, let me apologize for feeling the necessity of quoting some of the things I do. If I am to expose the wickedness associated with the PKs I must show you some of their thinking as expressed in this book. I have a copy of it before me. I am not taking the word of another that these things are in TMJ.

On page 49 Hicks boldly declares, "The Bible simply defines manhood by the phallus (penis), the very way the doctor did when my son was born. If that were all he had to say along this line, we might be able to let it drop there. But, on the same page he has a heading, "The Phallus as Determiner of Religious Service." Under this heading he writes, "We are called and addressed by God in terminology that describes who and what we are—zakar, phallic males.

"Possessing a penis places unique requirements upon men before God in how they are to worship Him. We are called to worship God as phallic kinds of guys, not as some sort of androgynous, neutered nonmales, or the feminized males so popular in many feminist-enlightened churches. We are told by God to worship Him in accordance with what we are, phallic men."

Of course, it goes without saying, Hicks gives no Scripture to back up these declarations. Why not? Because, he cannot!

The outrageous fascination of Hicks with the phallus continues under the heading, "The Phallus as the Symbol of Dedication and Connection." Under this head he writes, "The phallus has always been the symbol of religious devotion and dedication." His support for this is one Professor George Elder whom he quotes as saying, "Phallus, like all great religious symbols, points to a mysterious divine reality that cannot be apprehended otherwise. In this case, however, the mystery seems to surround the symbol itself . . . It is not as a flaccid member that this symbol is important to religion, but as an erect organ" (Pp. 51-52, TMJ.)

Hicks bemoans the fact that few preachers give "any clarification to men on how the phallus should be understood and used. The silence says as much as the overt messages. The phallus is not a spiritual subject to be discussed alongside God, the Church, and more ‘spiritual doctrines’." I read and re-read this to be absolutely certain I was getting the gist of Hicks’ complaint. It is obvious from his statement and its context that Hicks’ thinks the phallus and its use are to be preached alongside the preaching of God, the Church, and other "spiritual" doctrines. Yes! That is what he is advocating.

In support of this absurd notion that the understanding and use of the phallus should be a subject preached alongside of God and other spiritual doctrines, Hicks cites paganism as proof. He writes, "In most pagan societies, sexuality was seen as an important aspect of uniting the spiritual with the physical and with the worship of gods and goddesses. In many cities, sacred prostitutes ‘served’ at the temples in order to be the meadiatrix between the gods and humans." He then gives a lengthy quote (over half of a page) from The Sacred Prostitute: Eternal Aspect of the Feminine, by Nancy Qualls-Corbett. Of course, Hicks denies that he is suggesting that Christians should have sacred prostitutes but only uses this to support his idea that preachers are being sinfully silent if they do not preach about the understanding and use of the phallus just as they preach about God, the church, and other spiritual matters. My advice to Mr. Hicks and Promise Keepers is from Jeremiah 10:2. "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen."

Hicks continues his complaint, "Current Christianity cannot openly deal with or talk about the male phallus in its full sexual activity or fantasy." I have read all the sermons of the New Testament many times. I have never found any mention of the male phallus in any sermon found there. Hicks’ complaint is based on his psychobabble not on Scripture.

After discussing sexual addictions and other sexual problems men have, Hicks writes, "Our sexual problems only reveal how desperate we are to express, in some perverted form, the deep compulsion to worship with our phallus." He goes on to suggest that if we cannot worship God in this vulgar manner, the phallus will become an idol which we worship. He says,

When the phallus is given over to its full-blown spiritual power without constraint, it becomes an idol. Therefore, in the sacred Scriptures God makes it clear that the phallus, though being the symbol of God’s faithfulness and provision, must be regulated, lest it become a very mysterious taskmaster.

Totally flabbergasted with that last statement! Join this writer. Of course, we again have Hicks asserting that something is taught by God in his word that is not found there. I challenge any Promise Keepers member or sympathizer to produce the Scripture where the phallus is the "symbol of God’s faithfulness and provision."

If it were not that I have been asked to expose this movement I would cease quoting from this book and its psychological hogwash right now. Not only have I been asked, but since I have gotten into it, I feel a strong urgency to continue the exposure of the PKs movement and those who are aligned with it and those who lead it. The more I study the more fully I am convinced the PKs movement is born out of hell and is Satan’s latest and most effective tool in his deception of people, possibly some of God’s people.

Hicks’ obsession with the phallus continues throughout TMJ. On page 181 he writes,

I believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent phallic passions we experience as men. But it was never recorded that Jesus had sexual relations with a woman. He may have thought about it as the movie The Last Temptation of Christ portrays, but even in this movie He did not give in to the temptation and remained true to His messianic course. If temptation means anything, it means Christ was tempted in every way as we are. That would mean not only heterosexual temptation but also homosexual temptation! I have found this insight to be very helpful for gay men struggling with their sexuality (P. 181).

Hicks apparently does not believe in the infallibility of Jesus Christ. He believes that Christ had thoughts about committing fornication and sodomy. He admits he never gave in to these thoughts and temptations, but infers he could have. Since the very thought of foolishness is sin, any person who entertains thoughts of committing fornication, adultery, and sodomy is guilty of sin. The suggestion that Christ actually entertained thoughts of committing these lewd acts is to say that Christ was a sinner. If that were true, we have no Saviour. We are of all men most miserable.

It is apparent from the things that I have quoted from TMJ Robert Hicks has taken many of his thoughts from paganism, psychology and humanism. He has tried to Christianize this by claiming that what he is saying is clearly taught in the Word of God. I found, however, that his strongest assertions that something was taught in Scripture were always made when he gave no Scripture for what he claimed. A recent statement published by PKs still endorses TMJ even though they no longer distribute it free. In that statement PKs said they feel that "The Masculine Journey is a valid resource for men to grow in Christ."

The only way one can grow spiritually from this book is to grow in the spirit of falsehood. Hicks, though an ordained Southern Baptist preacher, has been so infected with his psychobabble thinking that he feels he can palm off his six stages in the masculine journey as a biblically based study. But, it will not hold water. It is "Christianized psychoheresy at its very worst, and I would not have spent my money on his book except that I wanted to get my information for this article directly from the source. 


I suppose most readers thought they had heard everything when they read what I have brought out concerning Robert Hicks, Promise Keepers, and The Masculine Journey. But, I am not finished. There is one other thing that I want to call to your attention.

On page 177 of TMJ Hicks calls for the celebration of sin. He wrote,

I’m sure many would balk at my thought of celebrating the experience of sin. I’m not sure how we could do it. But I do know we need to do it. For example, we usually give the teenagers in our churches such a massive dose of condemnation regarding their first experiences with sin that I sometimes wonder how any of them ever recover. Maybe we could take a different approach. Instead of jumping all over them when they have their first experience with the police, or their first drunk, or their first experience with sex or drugs, we could look upon this as a teachable moment and a rite of passage. Is this putting a benediction on sin? Of course not, but perhaps at this point the true elders could come forward and confess their own adolescent sins and congratulate the next generation for being human. Then they could move on to the all-important issues of forgiveness and restoration, but this time on common ground, with the young person as a fellow sinner!

Can you imagine a Southern Baptist preacher suggesting that we should celebrate the experience of sin? Can you imagine someone who is supposed to be a Christian suggesting that we should congratulate the young person who has committed fornication or gotten drunk because he is simply being human? That is what Robert Hicks is advocating. And, by their alliance with him, Promise Keepers agree and support this psychobabble.

On the next page Hicks writes, "If ever we needed to initiate the wounded in our midst it is now. We need to recognize a man’s divorce, or job firing, or major health problem, or culpability in some legal or sexual indiscretion, as a wound to which we show deference as a part of the male journey" (P. 178). The word deference means "honor, reverence, veneration, acclaim, homage, esteem, courtesy." Hicks is suggesting that we should honor, reverence, venerate, esteem, etc. the things he listed when they happen in a man’s life. Included in these things we should venerate, reverence, esteem, and pay homage to are legal and sexual indiscretions. Rather than looking on them as sin we should reverence them. We should honor them. We should venerate them. We should esteem them. We should look on them as rites of passage along the masculine journey. I ask any PKs member or sympathizer for one scripture, not for two nor for three, but for one scripture which suggests we should venerate, reverence, and pay homage to the sexual indiscretions (such as fornication and adultery) of any person.

It also appears that Hicks is in sympathy with the Dominion theology that is also becoming popular today. From statements by PKs leaders they also hold to this idea that Christians must seize control of the government of the United States and make it a Christian nations. Pat Robertson, who is becoming involved with PKs holds to this idea as does Jerry Falwell. Hicks expresses it this way,

". . . the King of creation has made us humans to rule as His vice-regents on earth and show forth what His rule should be like on earth. It is awesome to think that God is looking to me to reveal what He is like, but that seems to be the intended meaning of the term image of God" (P. 33, TMJ).

Hicks is also a proponent of the self-esteem heresy that is invading the ranks of "Christendom." On page 37 he writes,

This struggle for dignity (often wrongly referred to as pride) reveals only who and what I really am—a creational male. . . In my fight for self-affirmation, I am revealing the basic fabric of what I am and how I am made. The work of psychologists and self-help writers only affirms this reality, whether they realize it or not. The therapeutic remedies that are designed to recover or develop self-esteem, and the self-help literature, only affirm this intrinsic, deeply rooted but unexplained value. The value of human dignity, and thus self-esteem, is only explainable by creation and a Creator.

I must leave off exposing the errors of Robert Hicks. There are others who are aligned with PKs that need to be considered. Their endorsement of The Masculine Journey ought to be enough to destroy their credibility with any Bible believing Christian. They helped publish it. They gave away 50,000 copies of it at the 1993 Boulder meeting. They have an endorsement of the book on page 203. They teach its six stages of manhood. They helped to publish a workbook to go with it. Though they no longer give it away, they still endorse it. I downloaded their endorsement of it from their own home page.

You cannot endorse Promise Keepers without endorsing The Masculine Journey and the psychobabble of Robert Hicks. They go together.  


Another prophet of psychobabble who is aligned very closely with PKs is James Dobson of Focus on the Family fame. Focus on the Family was founded by Dobson in 1977 after the death of his father. Allegedly, "the Lord told" his dying father that a great ministry would be fulfilled through his son. Dobson has honorary doctorates from a number of universities including one Catholic and one Nazarene.

Dobson is a Nazarene. Therefore he denies the doctrine of total hereditary depravity, the doctrine of salvation that is wholly of grace and believes in works for salvation. He denies the preservation and perseverance of the saints. Is such a man qualified to counsel Christians?

Dobson promotes the PKs movement on his radio broadcast. His organization has published some of their books. On his radio broadcasts he has held out great hope that PKs would stir the coals of revival among men in this country. The book, Seven Promises of A Promise Keeper, is a workbook being used by the PKs movement. Dobson is a contributing author of that book. Another PKs book is WHAT MAKES A MAN? 12 Promises That Will Change Your Life. Dobson is also a contributing writer to this book. Dobson’s wholehearted approval of PKs is also an endorsement, spoken or not, of the junk we have seen in TMJ.

But, Dobson has his own problems, also. He is part of the self-esteem crowd whose doctrine of self-love and self-esteem is finding its way into many Baptist churches, even some Sovereign Grace Baptist Churches. Dobson is no newcomer to this self-esteem doctrine either. In his book, Hide or Seek, published in 1974 by Revell Publishers, Pages 12-13, 20-21, 152, he wrote,

In a real sense, the health of an entire society depends on the ease with which the individual members gain personal acceptance. Thus, whenever the keys to self-esteem are seemingly out of reach for a large percentage of the people, as in twentieth-century America, then widespread "mental illness," neuroticism, hatred, alcoholism, drug abuse, violence, and social disorder will certainly occur . . . .{Emphasis in the Original} Personal worth is not something human beings are free to take or leave. We must have it, and when it is unattainable, everybody suffers . . . a sizable proportion of all human activity is devoted to the task of shielding us from an inner pain of inferiority. I believe this is to be the most dominant force in life [Emp. Mine, RWC].

The Word of God is clear that sin is the most dominant force in human life (Rom. 3:10-23). It is not the "pain of inferiority," as Dobson claims. There is no doubt about his position on the gospel of self-esteem. Of his book, Hide or Seek, he wrote, "The heart of this book . . . is devoted to a description of ten comprehensive ‘strategies’ for building self-esteem" (P. 21). Paul wrote, "To me to live is Christ." To Dobson, to live is to have a high degree of self-esteem!

Consider also,

If I could write a prescription for the women of the world, I would provide each one of them with a healthy dose of self-esteem and personal worth . . . I have no doubt that this is their greatest need. [What Wives Wish Their Husbands Knew About Women, James Dobson, p. 35).


Feelings of self-worth and acceptance . . . provide the cornerstone of a healthy personality . . . it is apparent that emotional problems usually originate from . . . an inability to gain acceptance and respect from peers . . . I have observed the most powerful influence to emanate from ego needs [Dr. Dobson Answers Your Questions, Pp. 168, 191, 435).

In the November, 1988, issue of Focus on the Family magazine Dobson wrote,

"Feelings of inferiority even account for outbreak of wars and international hatred . . . inferiority is the major force behind the rampaging incidence of rape today . . . How about aggressive violence in American classrooms? . . . Can it be attributed to the frustration of low self-esteem? I’m inclined to believe so . . . The examples are legion. That is why I have contended that social chaos in all its forms is increased when citizens feel inadequate and inferior. There are numerous other causes, of course, but none so powerful [as low self-esteem. Editor].

That Dobson’s self-esteem psychology has not changed is evident from another unbelievable statement he made in the October, 1994, issue of his magazine. He wrote, ". . . some things in life are more important than academic excellence, and self-esteem is one of them. A child can survive, if he must, without knowing a noun from a verb, but if he doesn’t have some measure of self-confidence and personal respect, he won’t have a chance in life."

Dobson follows the usual line of many prophets of psychobabble and blames all these things he lists on the loss of self-esteem. This serves to deliver the responsibility for these things from the individual to society in general. This seductive message that centers on self is being proclaimed by many, including such men as Southern Baptist Charles Stanley. This message has been so successful for its chief proponent, Robert Schuller, that others have incorporated it into their messages in hopes of achieving similar fame.


Dobson published a book in 1993, called When God Doesn’t Make Sense. In it he makes the blasphemous suggestion that we should forgive God. This book was endorsed by both R. C. Sproul and J. I. Packer. In it he wrote,

There is only one cure for the cancer of bitterness, that is to forgive the perceived offender. Once and for all, with God’s help, as strange as it seems, I am suggesting that some of us need to forgive God for those heartaches that are charged to His account. You’ve carried resentment against Him for years. Now its time to let go of it. Please don’t misunderstand me at this point. God is in the business of forgiving us, and it almost sounds blasphemous to suggest that the relationship could be reversed. He has done no wrong and does not need our approbation. But the source of bitterness must be admitted before it can be cleared. There is no better way to get rid of it than to absolve the Lord of whatever we have harbored . . . It is the only way you will ever be free . . . . Corrie Ten Boom forgave an SS guard who shared responsibility for the deaths of her family members. Surely we can forgive the King of the Universe Who sent His only Son to die as an atonement for our sin (Pp. 4-5) {Emphasis mine, RWC}.

I cannot tell you how utterly nauseated and repulsed I was when I first read this blasphemy. The repugnance of Dobson’s suggestion that any man should ever dare to forgive an absolutely holy God overwhelms me. As I sat here striking this keyboard I became so incensed again that I found myself hitting the keys much harder than I should. I had to get up and walk around for a few minutes. I am writing this while in Bristol, VA, with Bro. Henry Horton. I just went down stairs and read it to him and one of his church members. They too were repulsed by the suggestion that mere man who is lower than a worm would ever be so presumptuous as to even suggest that we should forgive God.

If a man has resentment against God for something he should repent. How can man who is sinful ever "absolve" God of something when God is not guilty of anything? How can man clear God of something when God has done nothing of which he needs clearing? How can man acquit God of something when God is not on trial? Dobson says that he knew this idea of a man forgiving God "almost sounds blasphemous." Mr. Dobson, it does not almost sound blasphemous; it is UTTERLY BLASPHEMOUS! It is BLATANTLY BLASPHEMOUS! It is WICKEDLY BLASPHEMOUS! It is a wicked and blasphemous affront to God’s holy, righteous character. If you read this and you concur with the thinking of Dobson, or if you sympathize with Dobson, give me some Scripture in which we are taught to forgive God! I will be anticipating your reply.

Dobson, like Robert Hicks, is not above vulgarity. In his 1978 book, Preparing for Adolescence, which was apparently targeted at 10-13 year-olds, he graphically describes the acts and feelings of a man and woman engaged in sexual intercourse (p. 82). In this same book, (Pp. 86-87) Dobson condones masturbation and describes the "tingly feeling" one gets from it. Since masturbation does not cause disease and cannot produce babies, Dobson suggests that it "is not much of an issue with God."

Dobson also follows the trend of some psychologists who believe that everything centers around sex, the idea that is advanced throughout TMJ. In 1988 Dobson wrote an article for Decision magazine which is published by Billy Graham. In that article he stated, "We are sexual creatures, and the physical attraction between males and females provides the basis for every dimension of marriage and parenthood" {Emp. Mine, RWC}. I know that sex has an important place in marriage. But, the suggestion that it provides the basis for every dimension of marriage is extremely broad. Moveover, it is absurd.

Dobson is also cozy with Catholicism. I am in possession of a sizable body of evidence that he frequently welcomes them on his radio broadcast and considers them as members of "the family of God" while Catholics definitely teach salvation by works. He holds an honorary doctorate from Franciscan University. Scott Hahn, a theology professor at that Catholic university claims that Dobson said that he "had never seen a campus where the students take the Lordship of Jesus Christ so seriously." The November, 1989, Clubhouse children’s magazine, an organ of Focus on the Family, had a smiling "Mother" Teresa on the cover. The lead article in that issue was "Teresa of Calcutta: Little Woman With a Big Heart." The article was written in a manner that readers were left with the impression that Teresa is a true New Testament Christian and that she is doing a great work for God. The truth is Teresa is pantheistic in her thinking. She considers Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, and other religions all to be acceptable ways to God. She also preaches the false sacerdotal, sacramental, gospel of Rome causing millions to have hopes of salvation through the mass and Mary.

In 1993,when a Jewish Rabbi and Catholic Bishop, Richard C. Hanifen, were outraged because Jewish and Catholic youth were being evangelized at school, they met with 72 national and international "Christian" associations headquartered in Colorado. There was an agreement that "such evangelization was improper."(The Berean Call, November, 1995). In April of 1993, a "Covenant of Mutual Respect" was drawn up in which the parties agreed to respect one another’s diverse beliefs and to avoid "polarization"! James Dobson was one of the signers of this agreement! This makes him a party to trying to muzzle students who try to evangelize Catholics and Jews.

Can you imagine Paul signing an agreement to refrain from seeking the salvation of his Jewish brethren? Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. (Rom. 10:1-4). Can you, in your wildest imaginations, conceive of Paul being willing to cancel all his preaching of the gospel to the Jews?

Dobson has deliberately led his FOTF organization away from any Scriptural basis. In response to a correspondent’s question concerning Dobson’s views on salvation and Christ’s second coming, Dobson responded in October, 1989, that his ministry had made a deliberate decision to direct the attention "away from matters of biblical interpretation and theology, choosing instead to concentrate our efforts exclusively on family-related topics." He admits, by this statement, that his organization thinks much more highly of the psychological wisdom of men than of the wisdom of God revealed in his word. It is no wonder that he advocated that folks need to "forgive God" for the things he has put them through. He does think that God "serves to help people overcome inferiority and develop self-esteem and self-acceptance."

Biblical Discernment Ministries has published a report on the general teachings and activities of James Dobson on the Internet. In that report they say,

Dobson obviously believes in the "medical model" (which treats people as victims rather than sinners) as evidenced by his statements that everything from pornography and child molesting to love of one’s own spouse, is or can become, addictive. In fact, in his 1/23/89 interview with convicted child murderer, Ted Bundy, the night before Bundy’s execution, Dobson would not allow Bundy to accept any personal responsibility for his sin [Emp. Mine, RWC]; according to Dobson, Bundy’s behavior was due to an uncontrollable addiction to pornography, which was caused by [Emp. In Original) an immoral society that permitted his exposure to it.

Dobson follows the line of all New Age prophets of psychobabble. Blame your sins and circumstances on society. In a radio program aired on 1/29/96, the subject was "Addictive Behaviors." In that program Dobson said,

Gambling is only one addictive behavior; of course there are many others in addition to drugs, alcohol—addictions to spending and to shopping, and addictions to food . . . because of the cultural environment in which we live, and the list is almost endless . . . a problem that is gripping humanity . . . sexual addiction [Emp. Mine, RWC].

I have emphasized a portion of Dobson’s statement to show, as in his dealing with Ted Bundy, he blames all the wicked things people do on society, not sin. Being a New Age psychologist who has Christianized his New Age psychobabble first, and being a Nazarene second, he will not admit the extent of the sinfulness of the human nature. Man does not sin because of his sin nature; he sins because of society. It is little wonder that, on the eve of his execution, he would not permit Ted Bundy to take responsibility for any of the crimes he had committed but insisted Bundy’s crimes were caused by an immoral society which permitted him to be exposed to pornography.

This New Age prophet of psychobabble who blames society for almost every problem men have is, as I have already shown, closely aligned with Promise Keepers. He repeatedly mentions this movement with approval on his programs. His publishing firm has published some of their books. He has directed his ministry away from the Bible to psychology. When I am finished with this series of articles on PKs, I anticipate I will visit Dr. Dobson again for there is much, much more that those who have been seduced into the use of his materials and who sympathize with him need to know about him. Among other things, he holds to theistic evolution and has published that in his Teachers in Focus.

We have seen that two of the principle people with whom the PKs organization is aligned are false prophets of psychobabble. As promised, when this series on PKs is finished, I want to visit Dr. Dobson again. There is much more that needs exposing about his unscriptural approach to family life and life in general.

It may truly be said of Promise Keepers, "They have built on a foundation that is sand and daubed their walls with untempered morter."

[This article continued in the February Issue of The GP&P.]

Click for next article in December 1, 1997 issue of the Grace Proclamator and Promulgator: BOUQUETS AND BRICKBATS

Return to Index Page for Past Issues of The Grace Proclamator and Promulgator


Send mail to

This page last modified Friday, March 04, 2011


free hit counters
free hit counters