Click on this link to access a downloadable printer-friendly version
of this document. The downloadable version has been typeset with
multiple columns for easy reading, and is in the universal PDF
format.
Wolves in Sheep's Clothing and Hirelings |
Promising physical healing, elevated spiritual status, national deliverance, the satisfaction of executing vengeance upon the enemy, and anything else which will attract and hold a crowd, Peter John `Pete' Peters is the consummate flimflam man and con artist, always coming up with a new scheme to capture and hold the attention of the flock as he goes about his business of fleecing the sheep. With Peters, the rule is “Anything goes.”
From the spiritual standpoint, the teaching and the schemes of Peters have become increasingly dangerous to his followers, inasmuch as they typically call for the embrace of one or another false gospel. Moreover, the teaching of Peters now abounds with heresy and Jewish myth, a consequence of the fact that Peters now is seeking spiritual insight from extra-Biblical sources. The most immediate danger is posed by the perversion by Peters of the Table of the Lord from a period of solemn reflection into a means of receiving benefit; and his perversion of this sacred ordinance goes still further, following the lead of Papist doctrine.
Peters today stands as one of the most visible and influential voices in the Christian patriot community. That which distinguishes Peters from most of the other Christian patriot leaders is his `Christian Israel' message, which declares—rightly—that the Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, and kindred peoples of the world are the physical descendants of Biblical Israel. However, the `Christian Israel' message of Peters promises national deliverance, which the Scripture does not teach.
Though some mistakenly categorize as `Identity' or `Christian Identity'1 anyone who teaches the physical correspondence between Christendom and Biblical Israel, Peters wisely has taken pains to distance himself from the so-called `Identity' movement. While the followers of `Identity' do recognize the truth that the Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, and kindred peoples of the world are the physical descendants of Biblical Israel, the `Identity' movement denies the basic tenets of Christianity and is distinctly anti-Christian.
Indeed, `Identity' in many respects is indistinguishable from Talmudic Judaism; in particular, both reject the necessity of an innocent sacrifice to effect atonement for sin. The followers of `Identity' have no real sense of guilt and no true appreciation of the holiness of God. They view themselves as having been sold into slavery through no fault of their own, and they view Christ Jesus not as the Word which became flesh2, the Lamb of God3, and the covenant sacrifice4, but merely as a `kinsman redeemer'5 sent by God to purchase the freedom of his kinsmen. In this respect, they show themselves one with the Jews who wished to make Jesus king6, but rejected the concept of the Christ as a sin-bearer7. This concept of redemption is limited to the physical realm and has no benefit beyond the grave. The followers of `Identity' are blind to the fact that the physical redemption from physical slavery which was provided under the Old Covenant is but a type of the spiritual redemption from spiritual slavery which was accomplished by the atoning sacrifice of Christ Jesus.
As do the Jews, the followers of `Identity' consider themselves by virtue of physical birth to be heirs of the promises which God made to Abraham; whereas the Scripture expressly declares8 that it is Christ Jesus alone who is heir to the promises made to Abraham. Accordingly, the physical seed of Abraham are excluded from the promises, with the exception of those who, having been justified by faith, enjoy the status of union with Christ Jesus.
Peters started out as a ranch hand, became a federal bureaucrat, and finally moved into the ministry as pastor of the LaPorte Church of Christ, a tiny congregation in LaPorte, Colorado. Though Peters makes a weekly trek to LaPorte to hold Sunday services, his primary ministry activity is a daily shortwave radio broadcast which typically originates live from his ranch in Wyoming, together with a large audio cassette ministry which issues a pair of messages twice a month.
The ministry of Peters is remarkable largely because of the uproar it has generated over the years. The primary source of the uproar has been the so-called `Anti-Defamation League' or `ADL', a Jewish organization which exists to silence criticism of the Jew and which exerts an incredibly powerful influence within the American legislative, judicial, and law enforcement communities, as well as within the realm of the American news media. The uproar generated by the ADL has been in response to the position which Peters has taken with respect to factors such as:
Talmudic Jewish influence in virtually every sphere of American life, including the spheres of religion, government, medicine, banking, education, journalism, and entertainment.
Apart from the combined outreach of his daily shortwave broadcast and his audio cassette ministry, this opposition of social evils on the part of Peters would be but a tempest in a teacup, as evidenced by the fact that other Christian ministries which take a similar stand generally go unnoticed.
Until recently, the ministry of Peters has enjoyed wide appeal; this is due to several factors:
Peters addresses a number of issues which, though obviously crucial to this generation, are addressed by few other ministries.
The teaching of baptism for the remission of sin, in accordance with Acts 2:38.
Thus, until recently, the theology of Peters has not been as extreme or non-traditional as many have envisioned or portrayed it.
With the death of his first wife, Cheri, the charater of the teaching of Peters changed dramatically. Specifically, since the death of Cheri9, Peters has taught little of worth or substance. Moreover, several characteristics, previously absent, now are prominent in his teaching, namely:
a flagrant disregard for the integrity of the Scripture
Since the death of Cheri, the teaching of Peters has been characterized by all manner of heresy and absurdity. A case in point is a lengthy series of messages titled, “Ask Gideon”, which Peters began in response to a `vision' purportedly seen by one of his followers. In the course of the series, Peters has accorded legitimacy10 to the vision, and has sought to interpret it.
Foremost among the responsibilities of a shepherd is that of leading the flock to green pastures and still waters.11 But by encouraging his followers to give heed to false visions, Peters is leading them astray and into a realm in which neither green pasture nor still water are to be found.
The simple fact of the matter is that Biblically-sound teaching no longer is to be found in the messages of Peters.
The theology of Peters, like the theology of so-called `fundamentalist Christianity', is nondescript. Shallow, unstructured, and lacking in coherence, it almost totally is devoid of Scriptural underpinnings, having been cobbled together from a superficial and eclectic reading of the Scripture in which passages routinely are taken out of context. By taking passages of Scripture out of context, Peters claims Scriptural support for many concepts which the Scripture does not teach, including the following:
A false, self-resurrecting Christ.
It is obvious that, since the death of his first wife, Peters has lost all fear of God. Moreover, it is clear that Peters now has an utter contempt for the Scripture. There perhaps is no better demonstration of this pair of facts than that which was provided by events surrounding the divorce by Peters of his second wife.
Peters remarried soon after the death of Cheri. About a year into the new marriage, the behaviour of Peters suddenly became rather strange. Peters made a broadcast in which he read, almost verbatim, a document written by a teacher named Stephen E. Jones; the title of the document was, “The Bible Says: Divorce and Remarriage is Not Adultery”. Curiously, Peters read the document as if he were speaking extemporaneously, or from a script he himself had written; he did not acknowledge Jones as the author. Within the space of a week or so, Peters made several broadcasts in which he bemoaned the pitiable state of a man whose wife does not love him—broadcasts in which Peters was weeping and all but sobbing into the microphone. It was obvious that, with the broadcasts, Peters was preparing his followers to accept his imminent divorce of his second wife and his marriage to yet a third woman.
It would be difficult to point to a better example of Talmudic reasoning than the document written by Jones. In the treatise, Jones demonstrates the depth of his own mental depravity and his absolute contempt for the Word of God. Continually employing sleight-of-hand, Jones argues from (1) the code of Hammurabi, (2) the law of Moses, (3) the Masoretic Hebrew language (concerning which the Talmud is the ultimate authority), (4) the Gospel accounts of the encounter of Jesus with the Pharisees concerning the matter of divorce, and (5) the words of the apostle Paul. Handling passages of Scripture with tactics ranging from subtle and crafty to obvious and unintelligent, Jones twists phrases and sentences, even going so far as “inserting a few key words in the original Greek”. The resulting interpretations diametrically oppose the plain sense of the passages.
In the lynchpin of his argument, Jones shamelessly claims that the words of Jesus mean the opposite of that which they plainly declare. Jones begins by quoting Matthew 5:31–32, “It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: but I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.” Jones then asserts, “Jesus is here condemning men who put away their wives Babylonian style (verbally), instead of putting them away in the manner prescribed by God's Law.” Jones claims that Jesus thus allows a man to divorce his wife for any reason whatsoever, so long as he hands the woman a written `bill of divorcement'. But this is precisely the position taken by the Pharisees who confronted Jesus, seeking to ensnare him!
Having set aside the Scripture, Peters now resorts to gimmicks in order to attract and hold an audience. But the problem is that, unlike the Scripture, gimmicks quickly become old and ineffective. When a gimmick fails to deliver whatever was promised, people lose interest in the ministry which promoted the gimmick. Consequently, it is necessary to come up with an endless stream of gimmicks, so that a fresh gimmick may be introduced once the novelty has worn off the previous gimmick.
Gimmicks which Peters has promoted since the death of Cheri include the following:
The `Door Day' and `91st Days' observance.
The Old Covenant was characterized by multiple cycles of ritual, some of which were repeated daily; others, weekly; others, monthly, and still others, annually. The ritual was administered by the Levitical priesthood; it included acts such as symbolic sabbath rests, symbolic washings, the offering of sacrifices, symbolic anointings, and the burning of incense. The ritual utilized basins and other implements or utensils, the design of which was revealed by God to Moses. Both the ritual and the implements employed in the ritual were full of symbolism, for the ritual was designed by God for the purpose of instruction.
Old Covenant ritual portrayed the various facets of salvation, including imputation, substitutionary atonement, and propitiation, doing so in a manner which graphically demonstrated the extraordinary lengths to which God went in order to reconcile sinners to himself. But the Levitical ritual did not accomplish salvation, for the death of animals could not atone for sin, Hebrews 10:4. The ritual merely foreshadowed the sacrifice of Christ Jesus, Hebrews 10:1.
With the inauguration of the New Covenant, Levitical ritual was done away, having been replaced by the reality, of which the ritual was but a shadow. Likewise, the Levitical priesthood was done away, being replaced by the priesthood of Christ Jesus; this is the subject of the epistle to the Hebrews. Instruction by means of ritual performed by Levitical priests has been replaced by instruction in the written Word of God, at the hand of men to whom God has given the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher.
Nevertheless, under the New Covenant two rituals have been instituted. The first ritual of the New Covenant is that of water baptism, an act of obedience which portrays the death and burial of the old man and the resurrection of the individual to a new way of life. The second ritual of the New Covenant is that of the Table of the Lord, also termed `communion' or `the Eucharist'. The Table of the Lord is a solemn period of reflection upon the Lord, Christ Jesus, as the sacrifice by which sin was expiated and the New Covenant was instituted, I Corinthians 11:23–26. In the course of this reflection, the participants partake in common of a single loaf of unleavened bread, which is broken and distributed among them. Likewise, they partake of the fruit of the vine. The bread symbolizes the body of Christ Jesus, Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22, Luke 22:19, John 6:51. Moreover, the partaking by all of the same loaf of bread symbolizes the union of believers as members of the figurative body of Christ Jesus, I Corinthians 10:16–17. The wine symbolizes the shed lifeblood of Jesus, Matthew 26:27–28, Mark 14:23–24, Luke 22:20.
The apostle Paul warns against idle participation in the ritual, I Corinthians 11:27–34. Paul declares that he who partakes while failing to discern the symbolism “drinks damnation to himself”, and that, because of such unworthy participation, many in the Corinthian congregation were weak and sickly, and many had died. The dire consequences which attend idle participation obviously are designed to ensure that the Church does not lose sight of the purpose of the ritual, that purpose being reflection upon the nature and the character of Christ Jesus, and upon the redemption which he accomplished by the willing sacrifice of himself.
A point always to be kept in mind is that the purpose of the ritual of the Table of the Lord is not that of conveying benefit to those who observe the ritual; rather, the purpose of the ritual is to remind the participants of the benefit which they have received by virtue of the sacrifice of Christ Jesus on their behalf.
Peters has perverted the ritual of the Table of the Lord into a talisman14 for the warding off of disease. In doing so, he has shifted the focus of the participants from the source of all benefit, Christ Jesus, to benefit which supposedly can be gained through observance of the ritual. Those who so participate in the Table of the Lord, thinking to receive benefit, are unworthy participants who bring upon themselves damnation. Thus, with this foolhardy teaching concerning the Table of the Lord, Peters has given his followers not a talisman, but, rather, a curse—the curse of weakness, sickness, and death.
Unable to produce from the pages of the Scripture sufficient plausible support for the various gimmicks he has concocted, Peters has begun promoting extra-Biblical sources which purportedly provide insight into the Scripture. Some of the matters upon which the Scripture is silent are commented upon in the writings of the so-called `Church fathers', and others are discussed in books which purport to be ancient, but which undoubtedly are Jewish counterfeits or outright forgeries of relatively recent origin.
A case in point is the `Book of Jasher', which is mentioned twice in the counterfeit Masoretic Text15. However, the Septuagint contains no reference whatsoever16 While a book purporting to be the ancient book of Jasher has been published and may be purchased, there is no way to verify the authenticity of the document, inasmuch as no mention of the book is made in the Septuagint.
The book of Jasher is but one of many books—in addition to the books of the Apocrypha—which claim to be of ancient origin, and sometimes are claimed to be `the lost books of the Bible'. But most of these supposedly-ancient books have the fantastic character of Jewish myth and appear to be Jewish forgeries created relatively late in the present Christian era. Peters, by encouraging his followers to purchase and read such documents, not only is leading them away from the Word of Life, but also is taking them into territory in which they cannot avoid abundant exposure to the leaven of the Jew.
Much of the heresy coming from the microphone of Peters in recent years may be traced to his discovery of the writings of the so-called `Church Fathers'. The `Fathers' were prominent figures—purportedly Christians—living in the first few centuries of the Christian era, which is the period in which the Papacy was consolidating its power. For the most part, the `Fathers' appear to have been part of the evolving Papal institution, a fact which explains why their writings have been preserved17. The messages and articles of Peters frequently cite the writings of these men. Peters argues that some of the `fathers' were “taught by the Apostles themselves, or taught by the men who were taught by the Apostles”; but the assertion cannot be substantiated.
Peters appears not to have read thoroughly the writings of the `Church fathers' whom he cites; or else he is seeing in the writings of these men only the things which he wishes to see, and ignoring the rest; or perhaps Peters simply lacks the ability to discern heretical teaching. Whatever the case, the writings of the `Church fathers' abound with teaching which is absurd, heretical, and often blasphemous—teaching which is found in Jewish myth and in Popery. For example, in his booklet on the Table of the Lord, Peters quotes from one `Church father' who, in the immediate context, clearly enunciates the Papist doctrine of cleansing by fire, which is none other than the doctrine of `purgatory'. Another so-called `father' from whom Peters quotes, Cyprian, enunciates—in the very quotation which Peters selected—the heretical Papist doctrine of transubstantiation. And in still another quotation which appears in the booklet of Peters, Cyprian enunciates the Papist dogma according to which the `priest' who officiates at the Table of the Lord is offering to God a sacrifice of the blood of Jesus.18
The fact of the matter is that the so-called `Church fathers' were several generations removed from the apostolic era; none of them had direct or even secondary contact with the apostles. And, contrary to their appellation, the `Church fathers', show themselves to be subverters of the Church. The writings of these men demonstrate, clearly and unequivocally, that they were mired to the neck in the morass of Papistry. In no way are the pronouncements and writings of these men representative of the Christian Faith, or of the practice of the first generation of the Church. The writings of the `Church fathers' indicate that few, if any, genuinely had embraced the Christian Faith of the Scripture.
Jewish myth (that is, Talmudic myth) is a corrupting influence which the Jew has employed from the beginning of the Church age in his continuing efforts to subvert the Christian Faith. The Scripture repeatedly gives warning concerning the myth19 of the Jew.20
Disregarding the warnings of the Scripture, Peters since the death of Cheri increasingly has been teaching Jewish myth. One such element of myth is the notion that the enemies of the Church are not human, but, rather, are serpent-like aliens. The arguments by which Peters attempts to back this assertion range from the tenuous to the absurd. For example, Peters cites Deuteronomy 32:21, which in the King James version reads, “They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.” Ignoring the context, Peters claims that to be `not a people' means `not human'. Such an argument would be laughable, except for the fact that the followers of Peters take it seriously.21
While both John the baptizer and Jesus condemn the leaders of the Jews, calling them `vipers', the Scripture portrays the leaders as pure-blooded Israelites who are proud of their blood line of Abraham-Isaac-Jacob and who legitimately occupy positions of authority within the nation.22 This portrayal demolishes the claims of Peters and others that the leaders of the Jews are Edomites, other non-Israelites, or `reptilian aliens'.
The impetus for the claim that the leaders of the Jews are not Israelites may be traced directly to the `Identity' doctrine which disavows responsibility for sin, and thus, sees no necessity for the Atonement. The implied argument is that the Jews, being Israelites, essentially are good, and that their opposition to and ultimate rejection of Jesus is due to the influence of leaders who are Edomites, `reptilian aliens', etc. However, this argument is contradicted by the body of Old Covenant scripture, of which page after page records the persistent rebellion, adultery, murder, and general wickedness which characterizes the pure-blooded Israelite. Moreover, the argument is contradicted by the fact that the Scripture declares that Jesus “came unto his own, and his own received him not.”
In arguing that the enemies of the Church are literal reptilian aliens, Peters immediately discredits himself in the eyes of everyone outside the circle of his followers. And when the followers of Peters repeat this “the Jews are reptilian aliens” assertion to friends, neighbours, and business associates, they are viewed as mentally-deranged religious fanatics.
The result of combing a legitimate accusation, namely, that certain individuals are enemies of the Church, with an accusation which is absurd, namely, that the same individuals are `reptilian aliens', is that the entire accusation is dismissed, with none of it receiving serious consideration. Of course, that is the purpose for which the myth was formulated. The Jew, knowing precisely what he is doing, portrays himself as a `reptilian alien', so that no one takes seriously the charge that he is an enemy of Christ.
In an attempt to divert criticism from himself, Peters on occasion began calling himself a `prophet' and warning that any who oppose him would be the recipients of judgment from God. In an article in a recent issue of his newsletter, Peters gives several reasons why one should not `mess' with `the prophet'. Peters begins by citing Psalm 105:15, “Touch not my anointed ones; and do my prophets no harm.” However, Peters fails to point out the fact that the Psalm has to do with the distinction between Israel and other nations, so that the term `prophet' refers in a general sense to the chosen people of God, rather than to individuals within that community. Thus, Psalm 105:15 is addressed to the unbeliever, and warns him not to molest believers; the warning of the Psalm is not directly applicable to affairs which lie wholly within the community of Christians. However, the passage does have applicability to the case in which a predatory false teacher such as Peters wages an attack upon the body of Christ Jesus. Peters closes the article by threatening to curse those who refuse to respect him and refuse recognize the authority which he claims to possess. He cites the example of Elisha, who cursed little children who mocked him, with the result that the children subsequently were slain by bears.
But these warnings of Peters are nothing other than the old stratagem of the African witch doctor, taken straight out of the realm of voodoo. Whenever he encounters opposition, the witch doctor publicly curses his opponent. Later, in the dark of night, he or one of his agents secretly poisons the opponent. By the next day, there is no doubt within the village that the witch doctor indeed has the power to curse, and that he is a man to be feared and respected. Enslaved by their own ignorance, the African villagers are unable to see that the witch doctor is nothing more than a ruthless politician, and that his supposedly magical powers and knowledge of the realm of the occult exist only in their imagination. In reality, it is superstition and pharmaceuticals, rather than the occult, by which the witch doctor maintains control over the villagers and respect in their eyes.
Likewise, Peters is no man of God; he has no power to curse; much less has he power to bless. Peters is a false prophet who proclaims a false, self-resurrecting Christ and a variety of false Gospels. He has received no authority from God, nor is he to be feared; rather, Peters is deserving only of contempt.
Witch doctors and flimflam men such as Peters can survive and thrive only in the darkness of tradition and superstition; they cannot abide the light of truth. When faithful men proclaim the light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ Jesus, the true nature of men such as Peters is made manifest, along with the true nature of their teaching and their deeds. In the light of the Gospel, men such as Peters are seen to be hucksters of the basest sort; their teaching is seen to be brazen misrepresentation and grotesque fabrication; and their deeds are seen to be self-serving, deceptive, and malicious.
A recent23 scheme of Peters involves the ritual anointing of the cornerstone of courthouses around the nation. Peters is urging his followers to physically anoint with olive oil the cornerstone of the local courthouse. If need be, the anointing is to be accomplished clandestinely, such as by casually touching the stone with the palm of the hand, after pouring a few drops of oil into the palm.
On the basis of his discoveries in extra-Biblical writings, Peters claims that this ritual anointing reverses or `unanoints' the anointing originally applied by Freemasons24, and places upon the building a `Christian' anointing. But in this era of the New Covenant, ritual anointing—whether it is applied by the Freemason or by the follower of Peters—is nothing other than voodoo. The apostle Paul declares that an idol (that is, a false god) is nothing, I Corinthians 8:4, and therefore, is nothing to be feared. But to teach that Christians need to `undo' ritual Freemasonic anointings is to teach that the false god of Freemasonry is real and is to be feared. Idols have reality and power only in the minds of those who fear them. Peters ought be teaching that the ritual anointing of Freemasonry is inconsequential with respect to the Christian.
It is with weapons of the spirit realm, rather than with weapons of the flesh, that the Christian is able to “pull down strongholds”, “cast down imaginations and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God”, and “bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ”, II Corinthians 10:3–6. It is with “loins girt about with truth”, “the breastplate of righteousness”, “the breastplate of faith and love”, “feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace”, “the shield of faith”, “the helmet of salvation”, and “the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God”—not with a bottle of olive oil—that the Christian is equip himself for battle, Ephesians 6:13–17, I Thessalonians 5:8. It is with openly, with boldness and courage—not clandestinely, with timidity and fear—that the Christian is to confront the adversaries of the Church, Philippians 1:28.
The message of Peters has attracted many Americans who categorize themselves `patriots'. Many of these have no previous exposure to organized religion; others once were involved with organized religion, but became disillusioned and withdrew. Within this group are many who think themselves to be Christians, but few of them have heard an accurate presentation of the Gospel, and thus, few of them have found the entrance to the Way of Life and have begun walking in the Way.
Those of this group who somehow manage to enter the Way of Life (not an easy matter, considering the multiplicity of false gospels which Peters proclaims) start out as babes at the mother's breast. Regrettably, the teaching of Peters is anything but the `pure milk of the Word'25. Receiving from him no sound nourishment in the spiritual realm, the followers of Peters are unable to progress from infancy to spiritual maturity—progress which comes only through feeding upon the Word of God.
Moreover, the abundance of heresy found in the teaching of Peters is a source of stumbling to those who are new in the Faith. To lay such a stumblingblock is one of the most serious offences which a man can commit.26 And the supporters of Peters, with their contributions, are purchasing to themselves condemnation as partakers in his ministry, I John 1:9–11.
In retrospect, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the abrupt changes which took place in the ministry of Peters following the death of Cheri Peters came about because, to a large degree, the ministry of Pete Peters was the ministry of Cheri, and the ministry died with Cheri. From every indication, Cheri not only provided impetus and direction for the ministry, but also restrained the proclivity of her husband to stray into apostasy and sin.
On its present course, the ministry of Peters, such as it is, appears to be destined for oblivion in the near future. Certainly, the perversion of the Table of the Lord shall exact a heavy toll upon the followers of Peters. Having abandoned the Scripture in favour of Jewish myth, blasphemous ritual, and voodoo, and having turned from the reality of the New Covenant to the shadows of the Old, Peters no longer offers anything of value to those who genuinely long to be fed from the Word of God. The only sort of audience which Peters can hope to attract and hold is comprised of individuals who, being carnal-minded, are unable to look beyond the physical realm and discern the spiritual realities which the physical types of Old Covenant scripture portray.
As this revision to the article is being made, the Winter of A. D. 2007 is drawing to a close, and Peters is embroiled in yet another crisis. The sidekick of Peters, a retired27 Pentecostal preacher by the name of Applegate, made an announcement regarding the crisis, intimating that the crisis has to do with the health of Peters, but saying also that Peters is being attacked by a variety of individuals, some of whom are, or at one time were, associates of Peters. In his announcement, Applegate warned that the attackers are dooming themselves to everlasting judgment in Hell fire; for, says he, they are attacking a man who is anointed of God.
It would appear that the crisis is related to the report of an incident which took place in the local hospital, involving Peters and his third wife.28 In his broadcasts, Peters has attempted to dismiss the incident; but in doing so he shows himself disingenuous, in that he resorts to the `straw man' technique, rather than directly addressing the matter at hand. Citing a well-documented instance in which, years ago, he unquestionably was slandered, Peters conveys the impression that the newspaper report concerning the recent incident is of the same nature.
As often is the case with the ministries of so-called `evangelists' who rise to prominence on television, radio, or shortwave, the ministry of Peters has degenerated into a soap opera, a sordid and shameful affair which has brought into disrepute the Gospel of the Kingdom of God and has blasphemed the name of the Lord, Christ Jesus. One reasonably may expect to see in future episodes of this farce yet more scenes of divorce and remarriage; additional claims of treachery on the part of associates; further threats of divine judgment upon those who dare speak out against the wickedness, the blasphemies, and the doctrinal error of Peters; and continued claims of Scriptural insight and divine anointing. As the Scripture prophesies, “Evil men and impostors shall advance to the worse, leading astray and being led astray,” II Timothy 3:13.
May the Lord be merciful to those who have been deceived by this wolf in sheep's clothing; may they escape his wiles. May the Lord direct them to faithful shepherds—men having a genuine calling to the ministry; competent men who, fearing the Lord, with diligence feed their flocks from the Word of God.
These, having put the world in commotion, are also here present...and these all do contrary to the decree of Caesar, saying another to be king—Jesus.– Acts 17:6–7
We ought obey God rather than men.– Acts 5:29
This document was translated from LATEX by HEVEA.