# What's the deal with Beth Moore?



## Hamalas

Hey y'all, I've heard various ominous things about Beth Moore in the past, but have never really heard any specifics. What is it exactly that is cause for concern? I did a quick search in the archives but I didn't really find anything helpful. Any thoughts?


----------



## Andres

she's a woman? (half-joking and half-serious here)


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Andres said:


> she's a woman? (half-joking and half-serious here)


 
So is Joni Erickson Tada, Edith Schaeffer, Nancy Pearcy, Carol Nystrom, and Heidi Zwartman. I would listen to these woman speak. I have learned a lot from Heidi.


----------



## Wayne

I have no knowledge of her teaching content, but I noticed that the same question had come up on the Warfield List (on yahoo) last month.

Scanning through those responses just now, here are what appear to be the more substantive posts:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bbwarfield/message/31651

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bbwarfield/message/31654

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bbwarfield/message/31659

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bbwarfield/message/31660

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bbwarfield/message/31663


----------



## a mere housewife

Oh Randy, you're _much_ too kind. (I am not quite sure what to say when people say things that make me turn pink, and are definitely only due to their own remarkable charity.)


----------



## Andres

well then I guess this is another thread topic, but Beth Moore does teach men in church settings. She teaches them in Sunday school at her church, First Baptist Houston. When asked about this here is her reply, 



> \"Thank you for your inquiry about my stand on women teaching men. As you may know, the ministry to which God has called me is geared to women. My conference and weekly Bible Studies are entirely focused upon women. The only exception to an entirely female audience is my Sunday School class. Men continue to come and sit in the back. We never sought them but did not know how to deal with them. Would Christ have thrown them out? I just didn’t know. I handed the problem over to my pastor and under his authority, he said to allow anyone to come who chooses. I have wrestled with this and the Lord finally said to me, “I tell you what, Beth, you worry about what I tell you to say, and I’ll worry about who listens.” My ministry is to women. That’s where my heart is. I make no bones about it. But what if men come and sit down? Do we stop and throw them out? I really don’t know. I just placed myself under the authority of my husband, my pastor, and my God. Your servant, Beth Moore\"


----------



## Berean

http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/beth-more-16616/

http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/beth-moore-split-thread-19653/

There are more on Moore http://www.puritanboard.com/google.php?cx=partner-pub-7433483551647952%3Aah9e5h-kmiy&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=beth+moore&sa.x=4&sa.y=5&siteurl=www.puritanboard.com%252Ff15%252Fbeth-moore-split-thread-19653%252F#979


----------



## lynnie

Somewhere in blog land is a site with transcripts from her DVDs. She is a Christian, not a liberal, but there are quotes about not bothering with theology and doctrine and debates on things like Calvinism vs Arminianism. Then she says that if she did have to pick a side she'd be Arminian. At times she has remarks like the prosperity and self esteem gospel, but not anywhere as bad as Osteen. But not sound doctrine either.

She can be funny and tell personal stories that draw women in, but for a Presbyterian church committed to Calvinism I think her teaching women is unjustified.


----------



## Wayne

In the links I provided above, the first of them is by Paige Britton. She is a member of Faith Reformed PCA in Quarryville, PA. 
Here's a shorter version of her review:



> Beth Moore – Long Review Revised
> 
> by Paige Britton
> 
> Beth Moore’s book Breaking Free: Making Liberty in Christ a Reality in Life is a
> condensation of her video-based Bible study of the same name. Written for
> Christian women, Breaking Free offers readers and participants the “diagnostic
> tools” to identify and address “areas of captivity” in their lives (p.21).
> These areas of captivity are variously identified as spiritual oppression,
> wounds and disappointments, God’s chastisement, mediocre discipleship, and
> dissatisfaction with the Christian life. Ten central chapters are devoted to
> exploring the “ancient ruins” and “old bones” of generational sins and past
> wounds (pp.81-135). From her reading of Galatians 5:1, Moore assumes that
> Christians can “return to a yoke of bondage” and require further instruction
> regarding their deliverance (p.21). She assures readers that, whatever their
> area of captivity, through her study they will indeed enter “the promised land”
> of “absolute,” “genuine” freedom and liberation, defined as “the abundant and
> effective Spirit-filled life God has planned” for each individual (pp. xiiif.,
> 34, 2).
> 
> Throughout her book Moore prioritizes the subjective, experiential elements of
> the Christian faith. The most serious error resulting from this emphasis is the
> implication that Christ’s death actually did not secure for us true freedom or
> the “abundant life” that he promised his followers. Evidently we need to learn
> some new information and follow some new laws before we can “ignite” the
> abundant life, or, to put it another way, before God can “deliver us from the
> bonds that are withholding abundant life” and “set [us] free to be everything He
> planned” (pp.41, 177, 53, 51). Early on she hints that a secondary “filling” is
> necessary for the believer to be truly free: “The filling only He can give does
> not automatically accompany our salvation…[There is a] huge difference between
> salvation from sin and satisfaction of soul” (p.38). Later she explains that
> “our liberation is expressed as a reality only in the places of our lives where
> the free Spirit of God is released…[W]e are as filled with the Spirit as we are
> yielded to His lordship…The answer to liberty is withholding no part of our
> lives from His authority” (p.177ff., emphasis added). This more thorough
> “filling,” which Moore supports with Ephesians 4:19, is what we need to get us
> to our “destination.” Or it is part of what we need: true freedom is not yet
> ours, but it can be, if we roll away “boulders,” “tour ancient ruins,” “dig up
> old bones,” and loose the Holy Spirit in our lives (pp.61, 83, 4, 208).
> 
> Which raises the question of Moore’s instruction on sanctification. Her message
> has a clear triumphalist ring to it. We are to “address and remove” five
> “prohibitive” obstacles to the abundant life (unbelief, pride, idolatry,
> prayerlessness, and legalism), plus the “many [other] obstacles between us and
> the practice of freedom” (i.e., our individual areas of captivity), and we will
> indeed be “gloriously liberated” (pp.53, 29). Moore appeals to her own
> experience of emotional naturalness in her relationship with the Lord to support
> her belief that the place of “absolute,” experiential freedom is accessible in
> this life (pp.49f., xiii).
> 
> What is not so clear, however, is how long the “freedom” Moore promises us will
> last, or how we will know when we have arrived in this “promised land.” She
> gives the example of Christian women who (unlike other Christian women still in
> bondage) “had found freedom in Christ” from their particular areas of captivity
> (pp.21f.). But surely one is never finished with the struggle against sin,
> one’s own and others’, in this life? Am I to expect myself to “address and
> remove” my pride anytime soon, or even to get to the bottom of all the personal
> wounds and disappointments I carry with me? According to her metaphor, my life
> is a dizzying yo-yo of entering and leaving the promised land, sometimes several
> times in one day. And while she stresses that “obedient lives are not perfect
> lives,” by making “full liberation” conditional on my complete surrender to
> God’s authority in every area of my life, she leaves me bewildered – when,
> exactly, is my imperfect obedience complete enough to qualify for full
> liberation (p.179)?
> 
> One rather ironic element of Moore’s teaching is her definition of “legalism,”
> one of the roadblocks we must remove if we want to journey on to authentic
> freedom. According to Moore, legalism occurs whenever one studies the Word but
> fails to enjoy God; it is the absence of relationship, passion, engagement of
> the heart (pp.75, 77). This definition is fine as far as it goes, but it
> effectively obscures the fact that Breaking Free is all about applying new rules
> in order to gain what God meant for us as a gift in Christ. Since Breaking Free
> is also all about experiential things like peace, satisfaction, and the
> enjoyment of a passionate personal relationship with God, it couldn’t possibly
> be an example of human-centered, legalistic religion, could it?
> 
> Breaking Free is popular with evangelical women of all backgrounds because it
> speaks with assurance about attractive things – an enriched faith-walk, our
> personal relationship with God, emotional fulfillment and inner healing – all
> delivered in a very “biblical” package. But Moore’s focus is on us, not on
> Christ; and her teaching in this book and its corresponding study is riddled
> with doctrinal errors that Reformational churches would hardly condone,
> regrettably resulting in the spiritual misinstruction of the women who like it
> so much.
> 
> 
> April, 2004
> Paige Britton


----------



## Wayne

Along similar lines, I'd like to see some critiques of works by Carolyn Custis James, especially her _When Life and Beliefs Collide_


----------



## py3ak

I don't know if they've reviewed that book, Wayne, but Tim and David Bayly are Carolyn Custis James' nemeses. They could well have something on their site.


----------



## Wayne

Ruben:

They do have a number of threads, but I was hoping to find something more academically substantive, less vitriolic, and yet something which would still take her to the proverbial cleaners.
I've looked in many journals, and cannot find where anyone has reviewed her work, other than glowing reviews in the likes of CT. It seems that she's either not on people's radar, or they are afraid to touch the subject.


----------



## BobVigneault

Her quote wasn't too bad until she got to the part where God spoke to her apart from scripture. What will he tell her to do next?




> \"Thank you for your inquiry about my stand on women teaching men. As you may know, the ministry to which God has called me is geared to women. My conference and weekly Bible Studies are entirely focused upon women. The only exception to an entirely female audience is my Sunday School class. Men continue to come and sit in the back. We never sought them but did not know how to deal with them. Would Christ have thrown them out? I just didn’t know. I handed the problem over to my pastor and under his authority, he said to allow anyone to come who chooses.* I have wrestled with this and the Lord finally said to me, “I tell you what, Beth, you worry about what I tell you to say, and I’ll worry about who listens.” * My ministry is to women. That’s where my heart is. I make no bones about it. But what if men come and sit down? Do we stop and throw them out? I really don’t know. I just placed myself under the authority of my husband, my pastor, and my God. Your servant, Beth Moore\"


----------



## Claudiu

BobVigneault said:


> Her quote wasn't too bad until she got to the part where God spoke to her apart from scripture. What will he tell her to do next?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \"Thank you for your inquiry about my stand on women teaching men. As you may know, the ministry to which God has called me is geared to women. My conference and weekly Bible Studies are entirely focused upon women. The only exception to an entirely female audience is my Sunday School class. Men continue to come and sit in the back. We never sought them but did not know how to deal with them. Would Christ have thrown them out? I just didn’t know. I handed the problem over to my pastor and under his authority, he said to allow anyone to come who chooses.* I have wrestled with this and the Lord finally said to me, “I tell you what, Beth, you worry about what I tell you to say, and I’ll worry about who listens.” * My ministry is to women. That’s where my heart is. I make no bones about it. But what if men come and sit down? Do we stop and throw them out? I really don’t know. I just placed myself under the authority of my husband, my pastor, and my God. Your servant, Beth Moore\"
Click to expand...

 

Thats what I was thinking too.


----------



## tlharvey7

"christian" mysticism... it's like a nice cool glass of water with 1 drop of cyanide


----------



## Knoxienne

What she said about teaching women in a classroom setting was interesting: What do we do if men wander in? Throw them out? I've thought about this when I led or attended women's bible studies/conferences/retreats in the past. 

I think an easy way to remedy this is to realize that nowhere does Titus 2 ministry mention teaching or lecturing in a classroom situation. Titus 2 ministry involves mentorship toward women in the areas of keeping the home and loving their husbands and children and teaching sobermindedness in the areas of our emotions. It's hands-on and it involves the home and women in the family and in the local Christian community, that the Word of God be not blasphemed. Where women get this idea to hold and attend studies with syllabi, notebooks, study-guides, podiums, conferences all over the country, etc comes from a misunderstanding of the Titus 2 passage. If a woman is teaching other women in this way, in my opinion, she is acting as an elder, even if she doesn't believe in female elders, or she attends a church that is against female elders. 

Women should get together for prayer, fellowship, mutual edification, working together on projects, ministering, etc. But exegesis of scripture and didactic teaching geared toward men and women alike are the job of church elders and Christian male heads of household.


----------



## itsreed

This is a common theme in her teaching. It reflects the general weakness of the evangelical (dispensational) hermeneutic foundational to her teaching. Aside from the men-women thing, this is the critical failure of her teaching. A number of sisters in our church, recently (last few years) coming out of evangelical settings all have the same response when asked if they'd like to do a Beth Moore study, "I spent way too much time learning nothing from that sort of teaching. Why would I want to waste anymore time?"


----------

