Should Christians be Praying for Wolves? - by Rev. Anthony Wade

Found here. Our comments in bold.
---------------------------

Bombastic and inscrutable as usual, Rev. Wade expends thousands of words trying to explain why he is exempted from praying for certain people. 
--------------------

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. -- 1Timothy 2:1-4 (ESV)

(...)

In making a generic post the other day regarding the purpose of discernment, I casually referenced the truth -- which is that we should not be praying for wolves. While many agreed there was the same choir responding that the bible says we should just be loving and praying for everyone. Once again, I get that. It sounds noble and pious. I do not actually care what it sounds like however. I just want to know if it is sound biblically and guess what? It is not.

(...)

False teachers are not our brethren who have sinned against us, as referenced in Matthew 18. (Let's actually quote the passage: 

Mt. 18:15-17 If your brother sins against you,  go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that `every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ [Deut. 19:15] 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Follow Rev. Wade's train of thought: 

• Rev. Wade disagrees with someone's doctrine. 
• because Rev. Wade has the correct doctrine, the other person is a false teacher. 
• because the person is a false teacher, he's not saved. 
• because he's not saved he is not a brother. 
• because he's not a brother, Rev. Wade is excused from Matthew 18.
• Therefore, Rev. Wade does not have to pray for him. 

Note that each subsequent step requires us to accept an additional assumption, treated as fact.  And each assumption must prove correct in turn in order to arrive at his conclusion. If any assumption is in error, the whole train of thought collapses.

Each assumption places Rev. Wade in the position of God by making judgments about someone's eternal state, which he cannot know. 

It is upon this basis that Rev. Wade derives his smug certainty, excusing him from his Christian duty. He is attempting to relieve himself of his obligation to individual members of the Body of Christ, essentially by claiming they are not.)

Heck, I do not even expect Joel Osteen to answer any charges (Even Rev. Wade's language betrays him. He levels charges and accusations, not correction or exhortation.) 

I might bring to him. He doesn't even know me. But the charges have been brought over the years and unfortunately most often through secular interviews. His response is that he feels people already know all they have done wrong and he just wants to encourage them. Well gosh that sounds nice but it is not the Gospel. So when I am dealing with Joseph Prince's antinomianism, Brian Houston's prosperity gospel or Joyce Meyer's word faith the notion that I have to personally confront them is quite silly. (Why is it silly? Why does that excuse the author? And who requires him to "personally confront" someone?

Can the author produce a single Scripture that prescribes the treatment he levels at offenders of his doctrine?

There might be one Scripture, at least if it is superficially considered:

Tit. 1:9-11 He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. 10 For there are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group. 11 They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach — and that for the sake of dishonest gain.

Seems pretty clear at first glance. But wait. Who is the "he" to whom Paul refers? Elders! Paul is telling Titus a qualification for elders. Now it may suddenly seem obvious, but is there any reason an elder would require a qualification to refute the unsound doctrine of anyone except those in his church body?)

Now, if Houston suddenly said in a sermon that all religions lead to God, which he did, my job is to wait and let him either correct himself or pull a Victoria Osteen. Sure enough he denounced what he said and clarified that he misspoke. Good enough for me! Many discernment ministries still lay Chrislam charges at his feet and that is unfair. Anyone can misspeak. He still leads one the most heretical churches on the planet but I would not hold against him the one thing he admitted was a mistake! When considering the issue of whether false teachers are our brethren let us also consider the words of the Apostle Peter:

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep. -- 2Peter 2:1-3 (ESV)

This is why the foundation test of doctrine must be met first. We are not merely dealing with a rogue teaching but a destructive heresy. Prosperity gospel teaches people that God wants them to be rich and leads people to worship mammon instead of God. Word faith usurps the power of God for ourselves. These are not merely aberrant teachings. They purposefully present a different gospel and a different christ -- (The author never documents these accusations, especially with Scripture.)

which cannot save you according to Romans 1. Paul expands on this teaching in Galatians:

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel-- not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ. -- Galatians 1:6-10 (ESV)

Turning to a different gospel. A distorted gospel. Let anyone, even an angel with such a gospel be accursed! (Indeed. And apparently it is Rev. Wade's job to accurse them.)

The cult of Mormonism was founded by Joseph Smith who claimed an angel gave him another gospel when he was walking in the woods by his upstate NY home in the 1800s. Angel or man -- let him be accursed. Because of these false teachers the way of the actual Gospel will be blasphemed. Going back to the Peter verses we see the truth behind these people in that their condemnation is from long ago and not idle. Their destruction is not asleep. No references whatsoever to pray for those whose destruction is already set. (Argument From Silence.

Ga. 6:1 Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.

Notice that this is a generic person, not referred to as a brother.)

I understand that all of the sloppy agape church training people receive leads them to this point. That aside, let's delve into the key verses for today. Whenever you hear someone exclaim that we are supposed to pray for everyone they are referring to the key verses and sure enough the words "for everyone" do appear in the context of prayers. That is a pretty shallow dive though. What is the overall context of this verse? (We would hope he explains...)

Timothy was a pastoral Epistle, as Paul was giving Timothy needed wisdom as he was set to be the pastor at Ephesus. (This is false. Timothy was an associate of Paul, who Paul sent to this church to correct it until Paul arrived. We deal with this here.)

Chapter One actually warns him about false teaching! Chapter Three gets into the nitty gritty about church management, such as qualifications for overseers. Chapter Two, is far more attached to the third chapter. So what is Paul saying in the key verses then to his prote'ge'? When he says all people, does he actually mean everyone on the planet? Let us start with the simple fact that he is not only calling for prayer, but for supplications, intercessions, and thanksgivings. Is it realistic to think that God wants us to intercede for wolves who are devouring His sheep? (Whoa. Let's review the verse from 1 Timothy 2:1:

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people... 

Paul supplies a list of things he urges Timothy to do. For some people we give thanks. For others we intercede. Still others require supplications be made. Paul is not telling Timothy to do all of these for everyone at the same time. Such a thing would be ridiculous.)

Since He wants all to come to salvation, is it realistic to think He was us to beg through supplication for wolves who lead people astray? (Is what the author considers to be the standard, that is, what he considers to be realistic?)

How in the world are we to be thankful for someone whose entire existence has been to prevent people from being saved? (Having invoked an unnamed standard of "realistic," the author himself now becomes unrealistic.)

I think the context itself reveals that we are not. (We think you are wrong, and maybe even a false teacher, Rev. Wade. According to your criteria we don't have to pray for you. But we do.)

Let us turn to Gill's Commentary for further support:

"be made for all men; not only for all the saints, for all the churches of Christ, and, ministers of the Gospel; nor only for near relations and friends, according to the flesh; but for all the inhabitants of the country and city in which men dwell, the peace and prosperity of which are to be prayed for; yea, for enemies, and such as reproach, persecute, and despitefully use the saints, even for all sorts of men, Jews and Gentiles, rich and poor, high and low, bond and free, good men and bad men: for it cannot be understood of every individual that has been, is, or shall be in the world; millions of men are dead and gone, for whom prayer is not to be made; many in hell, to whom it would be of no service; and many in heaven, who stand in no need of it; nor is prayer to be made for such who have sinned the sin unto death, 1 John 5:16 besides, giving of thanks, as well as prayers, are to be made for all men; but certainly the meaning is not, that thanks should be given for wicked men, for persecutors, and particularly for a persecuting Nero, or for heretics, and false teachers, such as Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom the apostle had delivered to Satan. But the words must be understood of men of all sorts, of every rank and quality, as the following verse shows." -- Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Gill points out first the obvious. Prayer is not needed for those who have already passed from this life because despite Catholic myths, their destination is set already. Likewise, prayer is not need for the sin unto death recorded in 1John, (Sigh. Let's quote the passage: 

1Jn. 5:16-17 If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.)

because it specifically says to not pray for them. (It does not. John does not command us not to pray, he simply says he is not making it an imperative. The Greek reads, There is a sin unto death, not concerning that do I say he should implore. John is forbidding nothing here.

In addition, notice that John is talking about a brother. Ah, so a brother can commit a sin which leads to death. Hmmm. Remember the author excusing himself from praying for someone because they are not a brother?

Lastly, notice verse is not talking about false teachers. False teachers is the linchpin of the author's argument.

The author completely misses it here.)

While there is no consensus for what this verse refers to, (Indeed. It is generally acknowledged that this is one of the most difficult passages in the NT. And it is this passage upon which the author bases his doctrine. 

Does the author know which sins do not lead to death, and which ones do? Does he therefore know when to pray for someone and when not to?

The author has an unjustified certainty, bordering on arrogance, about this whole matter.)

one possibility offered are those who refuse to repent of repeated lifestyle sins or who have had their consciences seared. One might even consider false teachers (Again, the passage refers to a brother, and does not mention false teachers.)

who may have started with the best of intentions as those who have seared consciences. Continuing on, thanksgiving should not be given for wicked men. (The author persists in confusing a list of prayer items with a supposed need to pray everything on the list regarding everyone.)

We are speaking here about real persecution, not the soft political pablum that passes for it in this country. Nero was not be held up for thanks. Hitler was not to be held up for thanks. Everyone, did not actually mean every single one. In fact, Paul references a local trouble he had with two false teachers named Hymenaeus and Alexander whom the apostle just handed over to Satan! Not a lot of prayer going on there I suppose. (He supposes?)

When dealing with Alexander separately, a few chapters later, this is how Paul speaks of him:

Alexander the coppersmith did me great harm; the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. Beware of him yourself, for he strongly opposed our message. -- 2Timothy 4:14-15 (ESV)

Beware of him yourself for he opposed the Gospel! The Lord will repay him! That sure does not sound as if Paul is calling for prayer on behalf of Alexander. (Now we are to judge based on what it sounds like?)

That is because we are not called to. The fundamental underpinnings of such a noble sounding call is that we wrongly conflate wolves with sheep. Once we have passed the test that says the person is clearly engaged in extended and extensive false preaching that leads people astray and they refuse to accept correction for, it seems quite biblical to relegate such folks to the category of wolves. That leaves us with two groups of people -- wolves and their victims. Their victims deserve our prayers that they may come to the glorious light of Jesus Christ before the end to be saved. This is why the shepherd carried a crook, or staff. It is used to guide the sheep who simply may not know well enough which way to go. Correct doctrine is first of all the shepherd's staff guiding people along the paths of righteousness for His namesake. This is a source of comfort for believers according to Psalm 23. The other source of comfort however is the shepherd's rod. This is used by the shepherd to literally beat away predators of the sheep, such as wolves. In these last days we have seen plenty of preachers willing to wield the staff but seemingly have no desire to use the rod. Consider what scripture is to be used for:

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. -- 2Timothy 3:16-17 (ESV)

Using doctrine for teaching is using it as the shepherd's staff but reproof and correction? That is using the shepherd's rod. Showing the believer what is right to deliver them from what they have learned that is wrong. This is the part that many wolf-defenders miss. If I write something exposing a false teaching from Joel Osteen that is not done for Joel Osteen. (He has no interest in helping Osteen to stop teaching falseness.)

There is no need for me to discuss it with him first. There is no reason for me to pray for him at all. The service of wielding the shepherd's rod is to reprove and correct the teaching, so that those who have been ensnared may be set free. (On what basis does the author assert that it is his job to shepherd people in other churches?)

Discernment is not meant for the wolves. It is meant for the sheep. That is because as noble sounding as it may be, the wolf is not repenting. Their destruction is not asleep. According to what I see in the bible, they deserve nothing but our utter contempt for the damage they wreak in the body of Christ and the working end of the shepherd's rod. (And here is the crux of the matter. Rev. Wade has personal contempt for the person when his contempt should actually be for their deeds. And hiding behind unstated or misinterpreted Bible verses, he justifies himself for his contempt of the person, and thus excuses himself from praying for them. 

Apparently, God cannot do anything to help the situation, so praying won't help.

We have found ourselves compelled to examine Rev. Wade's screeds much more than we would like. Unfortunately, this has become necessary. Generally, he commits only minor errors, but sometimes he teaches egregiously false doctrine, which has lead us to conclude he is a false teacher.

We therefore continue to exercise our own discernment regarding his teachings. Our prayer for Rev. Wade is that he will find the truth and become a light, rather than a spreader darkness.)