Bethel’s Cory Asbury is a False Teacher and Should Be Avoided at All Costs - by Publisher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

------------------

Sadly, the Doctrinal Police too often go ballistic on supposed heresy, which unfortunately makes them suspect when there is legitimate heresy involved. If every little thing is "rank heresy," then when real heresy comes along, who will believe them?

But today, "publisher" goes even farther. In debunking this supposed heresy, he engages in a heresy himself, Nestorianism.

Why does he do this? Because the Reformed branch of Christianity believes in impassibility, which teaches that God's character is not subject to passions, emotions, or feelings. So in an absolute sense, then, Jesus the man must be separated from Jesus the third Person of the trinity in terms of Him being "vulnerable."

We should say that we do not intend to defend Cory Asbury. We are going to examine the author's statements.

(...)

Cory Asbury is one of the member artists in the Bethel Collective—and Cory Asbury has demonstrated himself to be a rank heretic. (Notice the hyperbolic description. Let's see if "publisher" actually demonstrates rank heresy.)

In a recent interview with Relevant Magazine, Asbury described God as “vulnerable.” I want to break this down a bit as this is typical charismatic theology that depicts God as less than who He has revealed Himself to be.

In the interview, he states:

We’re all going through stuff. None of our lives are perfect and easy. I hope that people maybe lose a little bit of that religion or some of that stuff that we’ve grown up with in church — the idea that God is only ever big and strong and bear-chested — and they could see Him as vulnerable, as on a cross with His arms wide open naked, bruised, beaten, bloody, for them and not be afraid to come to Him in that way.

There’s a Tozer quote that says ‘God waits to be wanted’ and I think that’s a concept that throws a lot of Christians off because it seems weak. I think it threw a lot of people off with the idea of ‘Reckless Love.’

You know, they thought it makes God seem weak or it makes Him seem vulnerable. I think the truth is, God is vulnerable and that’s the beauty of God. He keeps His heart wide open. If people could get ahold of that idea, that He’s not the aloof, far off big dude who lives up in the sky who rarely intervenes in our lives — if they could see Him as close, as kind, with a smile on His face, not a scowl, I think that’s a huge part of it.

First off, he describes God as “not the…big dude who lives up in the sky.” ("Publisher" deceptively edits the quote.)

To clarify, the Scriptures do reveal God as the one who “sits in Heaven and does all that he pleases” (Psalm 115:3). I understand that Asbury wasn’t trying to contradict that particular truth here, but I wanted to just add that for clarity. (So "publisher" criticizes Ashbury then immediately walks it back.)

God is the sovereign God who sits in Heaven and does what He pleases.

But this is where the “vulnerability” part comes in. The Scriptures nowhere describe God as “vulnerable” to anything. (It seems "publisher" is substituting members of the trinity. Ashbury was clearly referring to Jesus, who was indeed "vulnerable" in the sense that men had their way with Him, culminating with the Cross.

Now, we understand it was the Father's purpose that His Son was to die for our sins, but that doesn't change the fact that Jesus was powerless, weak, and vulnerable.)

God is the sovereign God, in control of all things, and who upholds the universe by the Word of His Power (Hebrews 1:3). This includes the cross. God is sovereign over every action that took place on the cross and, in fact, if He weren’t, we’d be in big trouble. ("Publisher" is changing topics. God's sovereignty is not under discussion.)

What Asbury is stating here is actually rather blasphemous. God wasn’t actually suffering on the cross, it was Christ the man suffering. As God, He didn’t suffer. This is included in the mystery that is the hypostatic union. God doesn’t change. ("Publisher" doesn't reference any Scripture for these claims. In fact, it seems astounding to us that the suffering servant, acquainted with sorrow [Is. 53:3], suffered only as a human. Quite clearly the man Jesus cannot be divorced from the godhead:

He. 2:17-18 For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

He. 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are — yet was without sin.

The writer of Hebrews is making a unambiguous point, that Jesus as high priest serving in heaven still identifies with the pain and suffering, which is required for Him to be able to serve this function.

"Publisher" is advocating a Jesus whose humanity and Godhood are separate. This is Nestorianism, and a violation of the hypostatic union itself.

It is "publisher" who is advocating heretical beliefs.)

This is an attempt to reduce God to human—to destroy the transcendent for the sake of immanence. My ways are higher than your ways and my thoughts higher than your thoughts. Yes, Asbury’s false teachings should, and rightly so, threw a lot of people off because they are contradictory to the revealed Word of God.