If I had a “Ministry”…

TW: I use satire (a fancy word for “sarcasm”) to make a larger point in this blog post, and I mention abusive situations. If you are a survivor of abuse, please use caution when reading this article.

Important Notice

“If the shoes don’t fit, don’t wear them.”

In other words, if the words in this article don’t apply to you, then don’t take offense. If, however, you see your reflection in these words, then feel free to take offense. Maybe your offense will propel you to make a change for the better.

About Being a “Minister”

There have been a few people (very few) who, because of the blog I share with Carolyn and the book we have written together, have referred to Carolyn and I as “having a ministry,” and as “being ministers.” Now, I won’t speak for Carolyn (obviously… although, I know how she feels about this because we’ve talked plenty about it), but I’m going to address this thought for myself.

But before you read on, I’d like to make one thing clear: I’m sure there are God-fearing, kind ministers out there (preachers, evangelists, pastors, teachers, and the like) of the true gospel who are actually practicing and preaching the truth of the Word of God and sharing it boldly with love and compassion. But… well… it’s just, I haven’t actually ever met one of them for myself, and I’ve very rarely heard of them. I think Carolyn has mentioned coming across one or two true servants of God, but I don’t recall coming across such an individual.

So I’m not saying they don’t exist.

I’m saying, I’ve never met one.

What I’ve come across, instead, are different types of false ministers. Some are charismatic, some are fundamentalist, and some are “progressive.” And, thanks to the boom of social media in the 21st century, I’ve come across lots and lots of YouTube prophets, Facebook preachers, blog-lovin’ teachers, evangelistic Twitterers, and BlogTalk pastors! But of all the “ministers” that I have come across — including the ones who are so eager to give themselves that “internet badge of Christian honor” and label themselves a “minister” — to one degree or another, they are all practicing and promoting Luciferian doctrines and/or practicing and promoting their own doctrines of men that fluctuate, depending upon which Christian organization they have aligned with.

I’m not saying they are all that way. I don’t know everyone. But I’m saying that the ones I have come across are that way, and because of my experiences, I’m very suspicious of anyone who claims to be a “minister.”

But I am not a minister and I do not have a ministry.

I have a blog.

Now, if I were like many YouTube prophets, Facebook preachers, blog-lovin’ teachers, evangelistic Twitterers, or BlogTalk pastors, I’d be absolutely thrilled if people were to call me a “minister” and if they were to refer to my blog (or my YouTube channel or my public Facebook pages) as being a “ministry.” I would love it! It would really make me feel valid. Legit. Important. Righteous, even.

And if I put more emphasis on important-sounding, ego-puffing labels rather than on the message of warning and on the call from God to share the message of warning, I bet that if I were a minister like those types of “ministers” I’ve been acquainted with throughout my lifetime, I’d probably have a ministry that made people feel good. At the least, I’d probably have a ministry that made the right kind of people feel good. You know, the sort of people who had money and who were influential in the community. The other people — those annoying poor, those frightful sick, those frustrating broken — well, their money spends as well as the other people’s money, true, but they probably wouldn’t feel too good about my message as a very important “minister,” because my message wouldn’t actually solve any of their problems, but just give them a temporary “high,” if they were lucky.

On the other hand, if I were a more progressive minister, I’d make a ton of money off making the poor and sick and broken feel as if my empty promises, false solutions, and hypocritical smiles and hugs would actually improve their lives in any meaningful way.

If I had a ministry like the average type of “ministries” I’ve been acquainted with throughout my lifetime, and if I were a more strict fundamentalist minister, I’d preach on the important things. The finer aspects of righteousness. Such as, no drinking and no smoking. I wouldn’t bother trying to help people get to the root of why, for instance, they are turning to alcohol as a way to cope. I wouldn’t offer any solutions. I’d just hide my secret or former addictions, or pretend to myself and to others that I “overcame” them, and look down my nose at those who dared admit they have or have had a problem with addiction, too. Or… well — if I were a charismatic internet preacher, for instance, and I had a previous addiction to porn, I’d be sure to play it up as if I were delivered from it, yet, I wouldn’t talk about how I was engaging in astral sex with people. After all, astral sex doesn’t really count, does it?

If I were the type of minister that the average Christian looks up to on Sunday mornings, I’d preach the importance of forgiving and forgetting. I wouldn’t talk much about repentance, because that’s not as important as forgiving and forgetting.

And if I were the type of minister that I’ve known in my lifetime, I might make sure everyone knew that sex before marriage is a sin, of course, but I would turn a blind eye to the fathers fornicating with their daughters, and I wouldn’t preach about expelling abusers and child molesters from the congregation, because the only people I’d excommunicate from the congregation were people who disagreed with me or questioned me. But I’d definitely make sure that everyone knew that sex before marriage leads to hell.

I’d also turn a deaf ear and a blind eye to anyone who talked about being molested, or expressed frustration or anger or pain at having been abused. Why? Because it’s more important to “put the past behind us” and to “move on.” The Apostle Paul said so, right? If the circumstances were right, however, I might offer to pray with and “counsel” the accused. But, as the Scripture tells us, I’d be sure to bring both the accused and the alleged victim into the counseling session; and I’d be sure to emphasize the importance of forgiveness throughout the entire session. Obviously, there would be no need to bring the authorities into the equation, even in the case of alleged child abuse, because as Christians, we should take care of things “in-house.” Didn’t Paul say that, too? Besides, if the children would have been acting holy, then the man wouldn’t have been sexually attracted to them, right? So if anything bad actually did happen (although, as a minister, I couldn’t possibly believe the child), it’s probably just as much the child’s fault as it is the man’s fault, right?

If I were a minister (unless I were one of those progressive ministers who smoked, drank, cussed, had tattoos, and sported lip and nose rings), I certainly wouldn’t tolerate cussing. So if I heard anyone, for instance, tell their abusers to “F off,” or if they dared to use the “F” word or any other ungodly word to express their pain and frustration towards their abusers, I’d certainly be sure to speak up. In the most calm, rational, loving, and Christ-like way possible, I’d admonish those foul-mouthed individuals to “show love” just like the Bible says we should. I’d also be sure to point out to them where Scripture says that we shouldn’t use course, obscene language. After all, what’s more important: the message of the hurting, or the foul language that might be used to give expression to their pain? What’s more obscene: the actual obscene act that violates another individual, or the word that gives expression to that obscene act? Obviously, the word is much more obscene; and obviously, it’s much more important (and much more Christ-like) to use non-offensive language when expressing the pain of suffering ungodly abuses. Therefore, if I were a “minister,” I’d make sure everyone knew this so that they could express their anger and pain in a more Christ-like, unoffensive, non-obscene, church-approved way.

I’d also make sure to preach to women the importance of looking holy, and I’d make sure the men understood that they need to look holy, too. After all, what better indication of a righteous heart than suits and ties and clean-shaven faces and short haircuts for the men? Or modest dresses and moderate (or no) makeup and long hair for the women? Or, if I were a different sort of minister, long beards for men? Or hair coverings for women? What’s more important: looking holy or being holy? Obviously, since I couldn’t possibly know the state of the individual hearts of my WordPress Parishioners, I’d preach that it’s much more important to look holy, so I wouldn’t be concerned about preaching to people the importance of actually being holy and what that actually means according to the Word of God. I’d just preach on the importance of looking holy by whatever standards of the particular Christian sect of which I was a minister.

Depending upon which organization I belonged to, if I were a minister (and assuming I were male, of course), I’d also make sure women weren’t allowed to have a voice at all, because what’s more important: truth or gender? Obviously gender, because the bigger issue that my favorite Apostle was speaking of in 1 Corinthians 14 was gender; it had nothing to do with orderly church services or understanding and respecting the safety and beauty of proper spiritual authority, right?

On the other hand, if I were a minister at a different sort of religious organization, then I’d make a very progressive statement by endorsing women pastors. After all, what’s the more important debate: gender, or understanding and respecting the the safety and beauty of spiritual authority? Obviously, gender is the bigger issue here.

And speaking of controversy… if I were a fundamentalist minister, I’d often rail against homosexuality. Mind you, I wouldn’t pay attention to the elders and deacons raping the boys and girls in the church and practicing their homosexuality “in the closet.” I’d ignore all that, skip right over verses like 1 Corinthians 5:12-13, and I’d make sure to point out to everyone in the church how evil the world is with their homosexuality. After all, if people are paying attention to the sin in the world, they won’t notice the sin in the church. Right?

On the other hand, if I were a more progressive minister, I’d probably be perfectly okay with homosexuality in the church. I might not even call it a sin, just like I wouldn’t want to call anything else a sin, and I would be inclined to espouse a “tolerant” ministry, probably even advocating for homosexual pastors and leaders within the modern Christian church.

But if I were a charismatic minister like many of the ministers I see today, I’d probably just try to stay away from the more “controversial issues.” I wouldn’t pay attention to the abuse and the hypocrisy and the sin and the perversion running rampant in the church, bringing great harm to people and ruining lives. Instead, I’d want to focus on the more important doctrinal and spiritual issues. Such as, the power of our words. And how God wants us to be happy and healthy and wealthy. And how God doesn’t want us to suffer, and how, if you have suffered or are suffering, then you just need to have more faith. And, of course, I’d preach about the importance of God’s 401(k) plan: sowing into my ministry. After all, what better way to build faith than to give me a portion of your money and wait for it to come back to you, multiplied, in a very nearly magical (but I’d call it “miraculous”) way?

If I were a modern-day minister, I’d preach a lot on the book of Revelation. I’d put special emphasis on whatever interpretation my particular organization chose to believe, and make sure everyone was properly prepared for when the Antichrist is going to appear. After all, what’s more important to focus on: following after Jesus Christ or looking for the Antichrist? Obviously, as a Christian, the Antichrist is the more important factor here.

If I were a minister, especially in a charismatic church, some of the other important spiritual issues I’d preach about would be gifts. Especially fortune telling and seer gifts the gift of prophecy, but the other gifts would be important too. Such as: speaking and singing in tongues, and particularly prophesying in tongues (bonus points for singing a prophetic utterance in tongues). Or gifts like healing (bonus points if the healing actually occurs, sticks for longer than a month or so, and doesn’t come with subtractions or transferences). Or, if I were really progressive and brave, I’ve even teach about the more “supernatural” gifts, such as: astral travel spirit travel, or seer abilities the ability to see into the spirit world, and even the ability to communicate with demons angels. After all, what’s more important: seeking after a relationship with the Heavenly Father, or seeking after gifts and abilities? Obviously, gifts and abilities. Not only are they much more enjoyable than picking up a cross and being obedient to the will and the Word of God, but it also keeps people’s interest. Which, in turn, would help pad my pockets with much-needed cash. And although I wouldn’t place much emphasis on what Paul called “the greatest gift,” which is love (that’s not as exciting as prophecy, is it?), since I’d probably be preaching tolerance anyway, that’s basically the same thing, right?

But I don’t have a ministry. I’m not a minister! And given my experiences with “ministers,” the last thing I want to be is a “minister!” I have zero respect for them, and their lies and hypocrisies and filthy rags of self-righteousness and their cold hearts and their refusal to love the truth disgusts me.

(Please refer to the beginning of this post — if you are a true minister of God and not a false minister, then this statement doesn’t apply to you, so there’s no need to take offense.)

So I’m not a minister! What I am is a very flawed and broken woman with a couple of blogs, who is desperately trying to share an important message with an increasing number of hard-headed, obtuse, ignorant, and usually frustrating group of people who think they are Christians but are caught up in practicing and promoting witchcraft.

(I was one of those “hard-headed, obtuse, ignorant, and very frustrating” individuals not too long ago, so… I speak from personal experience! But, again, please refer to the beginning of this post. If this statement doesn’t apply to you, then there’s no need to take offense.)

If I were a minister, would I actually SAY this? Depending upon what sort of minister I was, I probably wouldn’t. At least, not in so many words. I might think it, but I’d be polite enough to keep it to myself. I’d smile in the face of the ignorant and obtuse (after all, the money I’d be taking from them spends as well as the money from everyone else), not caring enough about them to try to reach them with the truth.

Or, I’d preach about sin all the time, and if you dared to question, even privately, the validity and Scriptural foundation for my man-made or demon-inspired theologies, I’d make you feel like a sinful, hard-headed, obtuse, ignorant, and frustrating person.

Or I’d call you rebellious and threaten to excommunicate you if you dared point out how I wasn’t following Scripture for not rooting out sinful people within the church.

Or I’d attack you and spread lies about you if you dared point out that my “theology” was repackaged Luciferian doctrine.

Or some other such thing.

Regardless, I am not a minister!

I don’t have a ministry!

I have a blog!

Even if I were so inclined to be a minister, I’m not good enough or holy enough to be a true minister of God.

And I don’t have enough arrogance and pride to be a false minister.

I don’t have enough self-righteousness to be a false minister.

I don’t have enough desire for wealth and fame to be a false minister.

I prefer to reject the prettily-painted lie and embrace the harsh truth, and this just doesn’t make for a very effective, modern-day “ministry.”

Furthermore, I’m actually less concerned with naughty words than I am with understanding the message that is being conveyed, so occasionally using or hearing other people use naughty words just doesn’t bother me to the degree that it should were I to be a minister, false or not.

So to those who insist upon calling me a “minister” or as someone who has a “ministry”: STOP!

Just let me be ME!

I’m not whatever version of “minister” you think I am. Given my experiences, a “minister” is probably one of the worst things you can call me, and if you’re going to call me foul names, I’d rather you call me one of those naughty words that you would probably never say. Maybe one day, I won’t have such an adverse reaction to people referring to me as a “minister,” or referring to my blog as being a “ministry.” (Lord, please save me from myself if I ever get to that point…!!) But until then, don’t put me on your ridiculous, man-made pedestals and stamp me with your ridiculous religious labels. You’ll be let down, and I’ll end up feeling like the world’s worst human being for being… human. Flawed, broken, human me.

I’m simply a woman who has a blog and who is trying, with as much love and compassion as I can manage, to share a message of truth and warning to other Christians, hoping that they either don’t fall into the same Satanic deception I fell into, or so they can start to recognize that they have fallen for the same Satanic deception that the Spirit of God rescued me from!

That’s all.

And that’s more than enough.

Before commenting, please read my comment policy.



  1. Love this post. You hit the nail on the head in describing the sad state of ministry these days. Since being saved twenty or so years ago, I’ve been involved in a few Pentecostal churches and most fit your descriptions one way or another. I have also had the great pleasure to be involved with a couple that were the opposite of what you describe, where the presence of God is obvious as soon as you enter, the leaders only call themselves brother or sister, the Holy Spirit just overtakes the place in the middle of service causing it to turn into a several hour praise and worship session with nobody leading but God. Where gifts exist but are not deemed necessary for salvation. Where they dont ask for money or even really require any. Sadly these are few and far between and there is only one I know that is still operating. Not sure if there are any in America anymore.


    • Hi Lawrence,

      Thank you for reading and for taking the time to comment. I appreciate it very much. 🙂

      I’ve been considering how I can best respond to you, and I have three main thoughts. I hope that you will prayerfully consider each thought and line it up with the Word of God that has been properly interpreted within context.

      1. Meetings among believers (church services) should be orderly, a basic principle that is Biblical and Godly.
      2. Not every spirit is of God.
      3. And, emotionalism does not necessarily indicate a move of the Holy Spirit of God.

      If I had the time and space, there are a lot of other scenarios that I could have described in my article, including the one you gave, where the services are “taken over by the spirit” and a “praise and worship service” ensues that lasts for hours. But please consider these thoughts again: services should be orderly; not every spirit is of God; and emotionalism does not necessarily indicate a move of the Holy Spirit of God, even within the context of “church” services!

      I go into some detail in the book that Carolyn and I wrote together (https://carolynandloren.com/resources-ecw/book/), but it’s very important for Christians to understand that Satan has an agenda that is being implemented today by the demonic, as well as by human infiltrators in both the physical realms and in the spiritual realms who are working with the demonic, to bring deception to many Christians. One avenue through which Satan’s plan is being accomplished is by using emotionalism in church services. I was involved in such assignments whereby I traveled in the spiritual realms alongside the demonic and other human infiltrators, and helped create a very emotionally-charged atmosphere. The people present in the physical mistook the emotionally-charged atmosphere as being a move of the Spirit of God, and as they opened themselves up to those emotions. the demonic took over, and hooked them up to the spirit of the antichrist.

      They felt great and they thought their feelings were of God, but it was NOT of God at all! This particular demonic deception would not take root if people did as they were supposed to as Christians: lining everything up that they say and do with the Word of God. At the very least in this case, conducting their church services in an orderly fashion, as is commanded by Scripture. But certainly, if they would not mistake human emotions for the move of the Spirit of God, and if they were not chasing after signs and wonders (spiritual experiences and manifestations), they would be less likely to be deceived by Satan’s tricks.

      So I urge to you please give these thoughts prayerful consideration. Please do not allow your emotions or spiritual experiences and manifestations guide you. Instead, line everything up with the Word of God that has been properly interpreted within context, and you will find that the Spirit of God will bring you into a correct understanding of Godly doctrine, convict you of your sin, correct you when you go astray, and train you in righteousness, growing you up into an individual who is pleasing to the Heavenly Father. (See 2 Timothy 3:16-17 ) Furthermore, a true move of the Spirit of God produces His fruit in your life (Galatians 5:22) and leads you into truth (John 14:16-17, John 16:13). These things are an indication of a move of the Spirit of God. Not an emotionally charged meeting that lasts for hours.

      Again, thank you for reading and for taking the time to share your thoughts. I appreciate the dialogue.

      Blessings ❤

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Hmmm. ‘Minister’ that word sure gives me the colly-wobbles (for those of you who haven’t heard… an English expression for ‘goose bumps’). Our comedians, of the Monty Python genre to be exact, recognised that we were a country run by thousands of ministries, in government as well as in church and so they decided to invent a few ‘ministries’ of their own

    I remember my particular favourite was: The Ministry of Silly Walks… where an unusually tall, lanky guy proceeded to walk round the halls of Westminster in the most ridiculous manner, with his long skinny legs kicking out in front of him and crouching down on every third hop. This set him above all other employees and made him the Grand Master of Silly Walks and so he quickly became the PM’s right hand man…. 😉

    That image has been burned into my brain unfortunately and so now every time I hear the word Minister, political, religious or otherwise, I think of that ridiculous sketch. :-/

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Hi, Loren. I have been following you and Carolyn for a while. I know you grew up surrounded by “charismatics” and the demonic. I appreciate the work you do so much exposing this and pointing to the true God, Jesus.
    I have been in a serious struggle about what “tongues” really is. I went searching it on your sites. It seems you guys aren’t a fan (maybe?) but also do not exactly seem to approve of it. I know the demonic uses it a lot.
    Do you think tongues is speaking in a heavenly language or a different earthly language (like Italian, Spanish or anything)? I don’t mean in a cessationism way, but what tongues really are. All I can think of in the Bible that could allude to a heavenly language is in Acts 2 where they were accused of being drunk. Also in 1 Cor 13:1 it says the tongues of men and angels.
    I thought you would be a good person to ask. Thank you so much! Marie

    Liked by 2 people

    • Hi Marie,

      I wish I could be convinced that the cessationist point of view is Biblical, but unfortunately, I am not convinced. I’m still open to it though.

      No, I’m not a “fan” of tongues, because it’s been misused to the point of ridiculousness, is often taken as a “sign” of salvation and holiness and righteousness, and it can be one of the “manifestations” that come about through the demonic within unruly “church” environments … yet Christians often mistake it as being of God, usually to the exclusion of all the other signs that point to those instances as NOT being of God. However, although I am happy to be corrected with Scripture, I don’t find where speaking in tongues is necessarily unbiblical, if it is done in an orderly fashion and according to what is taught in Scripture (and there are several Scriptures that give guidelines). If I realize differently later, and come to understand Scripture more clearly, I will be sure to make it public.

      In Acts 2, the people were speaking other earthly languages. That’s made clear in verses 7-11. Those verses also make clear that they were “declaring the wonders of God,” which explains what they were saying, and why they were saying it. And as far as being drunk, the people accusing them of “being drunk” were mockers. We all know what mockers are like: they make fun even when there is no reason to make fun. No where does Scripture say the believers were acting as if they were drunk. They were declaring the glory of God, and the unbelievers whose hearts were hardened towards the things of God, began to mock them. Overall, however, the expression of tongues was given as a sign that God had poured out His Spirit upon all flesh, and not just a select few.

      In 1 Corinthians 13, I don’t see that it is saying that we SHOULD speak in the language of angels, nor that it is even possible to do such a thing. But it’s saying that IF we could, if we don’t have love, it’s nothing. Too many people put the emphasis on tongues in those Scripture, when it’s clear that the emphasis should be LOVE. Isn’t that ironic? Paul was putting the emphasis on LOVE as being the greatest, and reminding us where the emphasis should be… yet, some Christians have done just the opposite and put the emphasis on tongues…. or prophecy… or faith… or money… or good deeds…. And interestingly enough, verse 8 is one of the verses cessationists use to say that the gift of tongues has ended, but I don’t see that verse as being clear as to WHEN that definite end will come, or if it’s even talking about a literal end… or if Paul was using poetic license to make a greater point. idk

      Anyway, it seems that for the most part, aside from 1 Cor, 13, “tongues” is a different earthly language that is unknown to the one speaking, but known to the others around them.

      I no longer speak in tongues. First, I don’t think my “gift” was actually of God to begin with, with perhaps one personal exception that I can think of at this moment. Second, as the cessationists teach, I don’t see where speaking in tongues is actually necessary during this time in history, unless, as Scripture says, “for personal edification” (1 Cor, 14:4). But because of what I’ve seen and experienced in my life, doing such wouldn’t be edifying to me. Therefore, I restrain.

      Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.