What do you think?
Rate this book
Charismatic Captivation 2nd edition by Lambert, Steven (2003) Paperback
Multitudes of sincere and trusting believers are unaware victims of "Charismatic captivation!" Through subtle, systematic indoctrination and brainwashing, victims are ensnared in the virtually invisible web of authoritarian abuse, psychological enslavement, and financial exploitation by unscrupulous, self-aggrandizing church leaders preying upon their followers for their personal enrichment and expansion of their private kingdoms. Many have been so terrorized by their ordeal of captivity that they experience the symptoms of Post-traumatic Stress Syndrome. Charismatic Captivation addresses the pattern of widespread authoritarian abuse that has been flourishing virtually unabated for decades since it was first infused into the very fabric, foundation, and functions of the Pentecostal/Neo-Pentecostal Church during the "Discipleship/Shepherding Movement."
Unlike the few other books addressing the problem, Charismatic Captivation, was written by a Charismatic Bible-scholar and Counselor, from a Charismatic perspective, for Charismatics, without Charismatic-bashing. Charismatic Captivation has been praised by theologians, pastors, and lay-believers as the most comprehensive and convincing volume written to date on the prevalent problem of ecclesiastical authoritarian abuse. It spotlights the salient signs and symptoms of authoritarian abuse and dissects the fallacious doctrines behind it. Most importantly, it offers victims clear, concise steps for recovery from the psychological trauma and spiritual devastation imposed upon them.
Shocking! Horrifying! Insensing! A real eye-opener! Incredible! Desperately needed! A fireball of truth!"—typify readers' reactions.
Unlike the few other books addressing the problem, Charismatic Captivation, was written by a Charismatic Bible-scholar and Counselor, from a Charismatic perspective, for Charismatics, without Charismatic-bashing. Charismatic Captivation has been praised by theologians, pastors, and lay-believers as the most comprehensive and convincing volume written to date on the prevalent problem of ecclesiastical authoritarian abuse. It spotlights the salient signs and symptoms of authoritarian abuse and dissects the fallacious doctrines behind it. Most importantly, it offers victims clear, concise steps for recovery from the psychological trauma and spiritual devastation imposed upon them.
Shocking! Horrifying! Insensing! A real eye-opener! Incredible! Desperately needed! A fireball of truth!"—typify readers' reactions.
Paperback
First published September 1, 2003
7 people are currently reading
5 people want to read
About the author
Steven Lambert
18 books1 followerThere is more than one author with this name on GR. This is Steven^Lambert.
Steven Lambert writes on Christian topics.
Steven Lambert writes on Christian topics.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
March 5, 2018
Having been raised Pentecostal and since grown to study and appreciate a wide variety of Scriptural interpretations/denominations within the Church as well as having a few of my own run-ins with Cult-like Christians, Charismatic Captivation definitely caught my attention. On a positive note, Steven Lambert does well to point out the errors of what was known as the "Shepherding movement", and providing a reader with an intriguing history of how these teachings came about in the 70s and 80s. He calls out various erroneous teachings that some Pentecostal churches practice, such as being overly involved with people's lives or threatening them with 'God's judgment' if they leave that particular church. In these areas I am in full agreement with the author.
However, there are also many negatives in this book, so much so that I honestly can't recommend it. What do I mean?
For starters, while Lambert does well to call out the errors of the so called "Shepherding" movement, I'm not sure he realizes that many of the ideas he appears to espouse in his writing could easily lead to similar abuses in the Church. For example, in the book's opening he references a woman who supposedly gave a prophecy about a large hurricane that was going to hit Florida at some point in the future. While only speculating that the Woman's supposed prophecy was fulfilled in hurricane Andrew 16 years later in 1992, he goes on to claim it was symbolic of a hurricane of false teaching that would hit the country with the shepherding movement. While I don't see a problem with his referencing a storm in a symbolic way, it's pretty ludicrous to give this woman's "prophecy" a hint of credibility. While I believe in the gift of prophecy for today, the Biblical example is very different from this sort of thing. For the most part, prophecy is meant to be a word of exhortation to edify the Church (1 Cor.14) and we are told not to despise prophecy but "test all things" (1 Thess. 5:19). On occasion prophecy was used in a futuristic sense such as when Agabus predicted the famine in Acts 11. However, these prophecies are usually very specific and open to humble criticism. I'm sorry, but saying that a large hurricane is going to strike Florida at some point in the future during hurricane season is about as prophetic as me saying I'm going to have a bowel movement at some point this week. Speaking as if this "prediction" had any literal significance is simply absurd, and so he loses much credibility right off the bat.
However, what's even more disturbing is Lambert's talk of other doctrines such as sanctification and apostolic succession. For example, in chapter 3 he writes:
"The true Church of Jesus can never be established upon any form of government other than apostolic authority. The Church Age began with apostolic authority in place, and apostolic authority will be in place at its culmination."
True, the Church is founded on the Apostles and Prophets (Eph 4), but his definition of "Apostolic authority" and succession is quite unclear. If he means simply leaders in the Church who start churches, travel, and are held accountable to Scripture and other Christians, all well and good. However, if he's talking about apostles as succeeding the original 12 and having special authority beyond Scripture and above all others we have a problem as this is Unbliblical and violates Sola Scriptura itself. Unfortunately, from what I gather it seems his vision of "Apostolic authority" is closer to the latter.
Lambert's wording on Salvation and sanctification is no less dangerous. Near the beginning of chapter 3, he writes:
"In reality then, the matter of "having a home in Heaven," or more appropriately and importantly, having rightstanding and fellowship with God, according to true Biblical orthodoxy, is dependent upon our submission to the process of being made holy, that is sanctification.... Similarly, the essential matter of salvation is not the matter of being born but the matter of dying."
Granted, being a true follower of Christ is more than praying a prayer or walking an aisle, and soteriology has always been a difficult topic between Calvinists and Arminians. True, we are called to examine ourselves and make our election sure. However, my problem isn't with his obvious Arminian belief, but in his strange wording of the matter. Contrary to what he says here, we indeed are saved by being "born" again by Grace through faith alone, not by "dying" or otherwise proving ourselves to God and others. The historic protestant creeds (both Calvinist and Wesleyan) agree that Grace and the New birth come first, and sanctification/change is evidence that Salvation has taken place. Going on Lambert's wording, it sounds more like we are "chosen" and then given a chance to work for salvation.
In all of this, he states that the Church was essentially in a "dark age" between 313 AD and 1517 AD, by which I can only assume he means the time between emperor Constantine's rise to power and the official start of the Protestant Reformation. This is pretty puzzling, as neither Luther nor the later reformers (Calvin, John Knox etc) would have agreed with Lambert's wording on Soteriology or Apostolic succession.
Lastly, some of his most disturbing language is seen in his criticism of women in ministry. Again, my problem is not specifically with his overall view, in this case, Complenentarianism over Egalitarianism, but rather the wording with which he expresses this view and goes off on a tangent when explaining it. In chapter 5 he writes:
"You see, despite the superabundance of boisterous protestations and brazen professions to the contrary being flaunted far and wide by the feminists and homosexuals bent on establishing a gynocentric society and deifying the female gender, and despite the pseudo-Christian, Jezebel-spirited feminists within the Church lobbying for gender-egalitarianism as a precursor to obtaining more and more authority and dominion, God did NOT create the genders with natural equality (albeit, He did create them with parity in terms of their status and standing with Him)."
I'm sorry, but this is garbage. I have been taught personally by female professors with Doctorate degrees, and many influential Biblical preachers/church leaders have been women. Yes, my egalitarian views are showing, but again, my grief isn't so much with his overall view but with the way in which he grossly attacks all Christians who disagree about women in ministry. I read plenty of literature by Complementarians and I can peacefully accept our mutual disagreement, but this is nothing short of an ad homenim, and does absolutely nothing to unify Bible believing Christians (particularly Charismatic/Pentecostals) against spiritual abuse. Much more could be said about his erroneous views on "Biblical gender roles" but space does not permit an appropriate response. Instead, I would suggest reading the works of J Lee Grady or "Man and Woman, One in Christ" by Phillip Barton Payne.
In conclusion, while Steven Lambert does make many helpful points about Charismatic abuse in Cultic churches, he errs in such a way as to create a church structure that is ultimately more conducive to the Church abuses we hear so much about today in the so called "New Apostolic Reformation." Moreover, he demonizes brothers and sisters in Christ over what most would consider peripheral doctrinal disagreements. After these observations, I simply can't recommend this book. If you're really interested in good apologetics against Charismatic church abuse, I'd suggest someone like J Lee Grady or the Reformed Charismatics such as Wayne Grudem or Sam Storms.
However, there are also many negatives in this book, so much so that I honestly can't recommend it. What do I mean?
For starters, while Lambert does well to call out the errors of the so called "Shepherding" movement, I'm not sure he realizes that many of the ideas he appears to espouse in his writing could easily lead to similar abuses in the Church. For example, in the book's opening he references a woman who supposedly gave a prophecy about a large hurricane that was going to hit Florida at some point in the future. While only speculating that the Woman's supposed prophecy was fulfilled in hurricane Andrew 16 years later in 1992, he goes on to claim it was symbolic of a hurricane of false teaching that would hit the country with the shepherding movement. While I don't see a problem with his referencing a storm in a symbolic way, it's pretty ludicrous to give this woman's "prophecy" a hint of credibility. While I believe in the gift of prophecy for today, the Biblical example is very different from this sort of thing. For the most part, prophecy is meant to be a word of exhortation to edify the Church (1 Cor.14) and we are told not to despise prophecy but "test all things" (1 Thess. 5:19). On occasion prophecy was used in a futuristic sense such as when Agabus predicted the famine in Acts 11. However, these prophecies are usually very specific and open to humble criticism. I'm sorry, but saying that a large hurricane is going to strike Florida at some point in the future during hurricane season is about as prophetic as me saying I'm going to have a bowel movement at some point this week. Speaking as if this "prediction" had any literal significance is simply absurd, and so he loses much credibility right off the bat.
However, what's even more disturbing is Lambert's talk of other doctrines such as sanctification and apostolic succession. For example, in chapter 3 he writes:
"The true Church of Jesus can never be established upon any form of government other than apostolic authority. The Church Age began with apostolic authority in place, and apostolic authority will be in place at its culmination."
True, the Church is founded on the Apostles and Prophets (Eph 4), but his definition of "Apostolic authority" and succession is quite unclear. If he means simply leaders in the Church who start churches, travel, and are held accountable to Scripture and other Christians, all well and good. However, if he's talking about apostles as succeeding the original 12 and having special authority beyond Scripture and above all others we have a problem as this is Unbliblical and violates Sola Scriptura itself. Unfortunately, from what I gather it seems his vision of "Apostolic authority" is closer to the latter.
Lambert's wording on Salvation and sanctification is no less dangerous. Near the beginning of chapter 3, he writes:
"In reality then, the matter of "having a home in Heaven," or more appropriately and importantly, having rightstanding and fellowship with God, according to true Biblical orthodoxy, is dependent upon our submission to the process of being made holy, that is sanctification.... Similarly, the essential matter of salvation is not the matter of being born but the matter of dying."
Granted, being a true follower of Christ is more than praying a prayer or walking an aisle, and soteriology has always been a difficult topic between Calvinists and Arminians. True, we are called to examine ourselves and make our election sure. However, my problem isn't with his obvious Arminian belief, but in his strange wording of the matter. Contrary to what he says here, we indeed are saved by being "born" again by Grace through faith alone, not by "dying" or otherwise proving ourselves to God and others. The historic protestant creeds (both Calvinist and Wesleyan) agree that Grace and the New birth come first, and sanctification/change is evidence that Salvation has taken place. Going on Lambert's wording, it sounds more like we are "chosen" and then given a chance to work for salvation.
In all of this, he states that the Church was essentially in a "dark age" between 313 AD and 1517 AD, by which I can only assume he means the time between emperor Constantine's rise to power and the official start of the Protestant Reformation. This is pretty puzzling, as neither Luther nor the later reformers (Calvin, John Knox etc) would have agreed with Lambert's wording on Soteriology or Apostolic succession.
Lastly, some of his most disturbing language is seen in his criticism of women in ministry. Again, my problem is not specifically with his overall view, in this case, Complenentarianism over Egalitarianism, but rather the wording with which he expresses this view and goes off on a tangent when explaining it. In chapter 5 he writes:
"You see, despite the superabundance of boisterous protestations and brazen professions to the contrary being flaunted far and wide by the feminists and homosexuals bent on establishing a gynocentric society and deifying the female gender, and despite the pseudo-Christian, Jezebel-spirited feminists within the Church lobbying for gender-egalitarianism as a precursor to obtaining more and more authority and dominion, God did NOT create the genders with natural equality (albeit, He did create them with parity in terms of their status and standing with Him)."
I'm sorry, but this is garbage. I have been taught personally by female professors with Doctorate degrees, and many influential Biblical preachers/church leaders have been women. Yes, my egalitarian views are showing, but again, my grief isn't so much with his overall view but with the way in which he grossly attacks all Christians who disagree about women in ministry. I read plenty of literature by Complementarians and I can peacefully accept our mutual disagreement, but this is nothing short of an ad homenim, and does absolutely nothing to unify Bible believing Christians (particularly Charismatic/Pentecostals) against spiritual abuse. Much more could be said about his erroneous views on "Biblical gender roles" but space does not permit an appropriate response. Instead, I would suggest reading the works of J Lee Grady or "Man and Woman, One in Christ" by Phillip Barton Payne.
In conclusion, while Steven Lambert does make many helpful points about Charismatic abuse in Cultic churches, he errs in such a way as to create a church structure that is ultimately more conducive to the Church abuses we hear so much about today in the so called "New Apostolic Reformation." Moreover, he demonizes brothers and sisters in Christ over what most would consider peripheral doctrinal disagreements. After these observations, I simply can't recommend this book. If you're really interested in good apologetics against Charismatic church abuse, I'd suggest someone like J Lee Grady or the Reformed Charismatics such as Wayne Grudem or Sam Storms.
July 17, 2020
After spending 12 years in what proved to be an abusive church, I did a great deal of research to find out about how these churches operate. This book was absolutely key in helping me break the ties and regain my freedom from a very controlling atmosphere. The research Dr. Lambert has done has proven to be very valuable in understanding how these places twist scripture to maintain their control. Understanding how and why these places operate is essential in dealing with the fallout after leaving, and this book really helped with that. Understanding brings light, and light brings freedom. I highly recommend this book.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews