Page 76-77. James realizes that Jesus healed instantaneously, totally, and everyone. No more excuses, he says. It must be this way today too. Yes. I agree. I was in one of Mr. Maloney's meetings. To my knowledge, no one was healed. Perhaps some healings came later, but to my knowledge nothing of a permanent nature took place that night. I grow sad inside thinking of the little guy in a chair at that event, who has come to meeting after meeting with his parents, seeking relief from what seems to be a painful and oh so difficult illness. Nothing instantaneous, total or in part, was done for him that night. Can God do it? Yes of course. Will He? Why not!? But did Dr. Maloney have a part in healing that boy, that most obvious case of need in that meeting? I believe not. I say it not to criticize or even find fault. I say it to offer Maloney's words to his actions, and with him the actions of an entire new school of faith healers with similar results.

Page 78. " Christian means little Christ", little anointed one, attempting to equate God's people with God. "Little gods", said another famous preacher.

No. Freudian does not mean "little Freud." Mexican does not mean "little Mexico". That suffix simply means:

1) belonging to or relating to; a person belonging to or coming

from: Mexican

2) typical of or resembling; a person typical of: adhering to or following; Elizabethan

3) an adherent of: Christian

4) a person who specializes or is expert in. dietician

Page 79. Refreshingly honest often in the book, Dr. Maloney confesses, through a Dr. Macarthur (not John) that most "miracles" in our day have been in the realm of the functional or psychogenic diseases. In other words, invisible! Has anyone seen a miracle that was "organic", where creation took place before their eyes, or some other visible change occurred? Maloney says he has seen this often, and he writes of it in his book, but offers not one shred of evidence, in my opinion.

Page 79. Maloney believes that " keys of the kingdom" refers to the miraculous. But the way things unfold in the Book of Acts, it would seem that Peter's preaching, not his miracle-working, is what opened the door of the Gospel to the Pentecost crowd and the family of Cornelius. Others might argue, "the thing preached." Only in charismatic circles will you hear that Peter's miracle-working power is what brought Jews and Gentiles into fellowship with God.

Page 80. "His stripes heal us" = "His stripes bring us to a state of euphoria!" (translation of David Alsobrook, a fellow charismatic writer).

Page 84. Isaiah 10:27, "The yoke will be destroyed because of the anointing oil", per Maloney's paraphrase, becomes, "the neck will become so spiritually fat that the yoke will not be able to go around it." Oh my!

Page 114. He quotes (apostle) David Cannistraci, in The Gift of the Apostle. "We must see that anyone sent by God is apostolic." "Makes sense to me," adds Maloney. Makes no sense to me. God determines who was and was not apostolic. The church has nothing to do with it.

Page 117. As is typical in the charismatic way, we hear God speak in the vernacular often in this book. In response to an idea from James to the Lord, the Lord supposedly responds, "Yeah, I'll take you up on that." Jokes James, “God doesn't always speak KJV.”

Page 145. The Key to the miraculous is having an "open heavens", and "angels ascending & descending on us." So says James Maloney. No documentation for this declaration. But you’ll hear it a lot today.

Page 146. Revelation 21:3. "The Tabernacle of God is with men". Clearly this is a Millennial thought letting us know just how Earth-centric is God's plan for our future, at least the first 1000 years of it. But charismatic thought brings this concept into our present age! Yes, God lives among His people and in individual Christians. But the establishment of a world-wide Kingdom and a center for Christ in the midst of it is definitely not here. To announce such a notion to the world is to have them looking in vain for its reality.

Page 150. Maloney believes that if someone claims apostolic authority but has no serious power to back it up, he is of questionable authority! Yes, exactly! That is the point of this investigation. We call upon James Maloney to back up by eyewitness and medical documentation the claims published of God's power being released.

Page 150. "It has been taught" that there are four categories of miracles. He proceeds to define each category as though there really were such a division in Scripture, or accepted by the church worldwide. This is one of several times when Dr. Maloney speaks with an authority not given to him.

Page 154, 357. Here is the classic definition of "rhema" vs. "logos" parroted by many even in evangelical circles. Maloney claims that the very breath of God is behind the prophetic word, which to him is rhema. If indeed he equates the rhema of today with the rhema of Scripture, we do indeed have a problem.

Fact is that the division between the two Greek words is artificial to begin with. Rhema and logos are used interchangeably in Scripture. The one means "an utterance", the other "something said". Identical. Secondary meaning of both, "a topic." Many definitions follow in both entries. Where the current division came from seems to be the same source as all the chaotic teachings of this chaotic generation. It is glibly repeated that the "logos" is the written word, and the "rhema" is the spoken word. If you buy that, you can take it one step further: we still have "rhema" today. Next step, that rhema is on a par with what the apostles said.

All wrong. John 1:1, In the beginning was the Word. (Logos). Not written! Galatians 5:14. All the law is fulfilled in one word. (Rhema). Written! See how easy it is to debunk modern theory? To burst bubbles? Every believer needs a concordance with which to be strong against these strange new waves of thought. God's Word does not change! (Written or spoken!)

Page 154. Mr. Maloney tends to be very agreeable to most any church practice. Then he comes against it, but gently. For example, first he says that the practice called "prayer mapping" along with prayer walks, is needed. In the next breath he says that there is not a lot of Scriptural backing for that kind of binding. He goes on to define “binding” his way.

Page 156. He makes the serious claim on this page, that anyone who is not into the miraculous in our day, is preaching another Jesus. A quick look at church history throws that idea out the window, where it belongs.

Page 167. The church, says JM, is out of order structurally because there are no apostles... Apostles after all are foundational (He fails to see that the foundation was already laid!). Every teacher must have signs and wonders backing him up. In his eyes, every church, or every generation, or every city, must have "foundational" apostles. So we keep laying the foundation over and over. Trouble with that is, the book of Revelation speaks of only one set of foundational apostles. The literature they left behind serves as the ongoing foundation of the church. And oh my how that foundation has been attacked. But not harmed, thank you Jesus! More, much more, about apostles later.

Page 169. Talks about apostles being first. He then refers people, for whom, in this place at least, he seems to have a very low opinion, to some "hermeneutics website" to check out what is "the law of first things." He doesn't take the time to do this himself, because, I believer, there is no such law. Is he referring to the "law of first mention", whereby the first time a topic is brought up in Scripture, that episode is definitive of that topic from then on? Hard to say what the Doctor has in mind here.

Page 171. Here he implies that apostles are "territorial", i.e. they have certain spheres of influence (turf). He says that thousands of people are coming into the knowledge that they are apostles! An astounding observance. How does he know this? And really, is the "coming into knowledge" of such a thing consistent with the way apostles were chosen by the Lord, or even in a minor, small "a" sense, by the church, through the years? Would there have been any doubt in the mind of any true apostle of Jesus Christ that that was his office? Would someone have to give me a memo, a text, an email, a memory-jog to wake me up to the fact that I truly am an apostle? Do I need another church member saying such to me?

I have been dubbed "apostolic" by a couple of these folks. Sends one spiraling into fantastic ideas about what it could mean. But if there is any doubt in my or anyone's mind about who the real apostles are, the apostolic reformation (the new one, mind you, the NAR) is determined to sort it all out for you. Pastors and prophets are even now being "promoted" by these self-acclaimed apostles. The promotees are at first dazed, then slowly convinced, that, You know, they're right! C'est Moi! I am an apostle! Why did I not think of that?

Muhammad had a similar experience. But we won't go there for now.

Page 172. More of Maloney's definition of what it means to be an apostle. Bottom line: signs, wonders, miracles. Really? Stephen was an apostle? Philip was an apostle? No. Just because he establishes churches, has a deliverance ministry, or is very aggressive, doesn't make him an apostle. Signs and wonders are the key! Again, we are tempted to agree with his analysis when we realize how very few— if any— true miracles have been done by these men, in comparison to the Biblical models, whose record was perfect.

We should be challenging claims to the miraculous, but never acting in disbelief to our God, who certainly is able to do whatever we ask Him to do. There's the balance needed. The messengers may be fraudulent, but God is not therefore impotent. We must look past the show and see the Saviour, filled with compassion and so willing to bless His people.

Page 174. If a church does not have a prophet or an apostle somehow connected to it, it is incomplete, not properly equipped and activated. Pretty strong statement. Can that be proved by Scriptures, that were written in the age of the true apostles? How many churches were pastored by or regularly attended by or in some way supervised by, an apostle? The direction those churches received are the same ones we have in our New Testament today! Why do we need new directions?

Page 174. Once more using his acquired authority, he says categorically that signs etc. fall into three categories. Life, creation, conquest. He then proceeds to define them. But whence the Bible backing for such definitions?

Page 186. Salvation is to be a by-product of the miraculous! Almost leads one to believe that, if one was not saved via a miracle, his salvation is not valid. James would never say this, but the implication is there. According to Maloney, Jesus' Gospel was signs, wonders, and miracles. He proved everything he said by the miraculous.

Perhaps without knowing it, Dr. Maloney solves his own self-created dilemma here. Fact is, the Gospel was what He said! The miracles backed it up. He and the rest of the charismatic world want it the other way around: Miracles first, salvation secondary. What miracle was performed when Zacchaeus' life was turned around? The rules just won't always work. God saves by HIs Word, and His Son. Signs backed up both. And the proof was for all time. The truth has been established.