Responding To Dan Bohi's "The Voice" By James Scullin

 Before reading this keep in mind that Dan Bohi has proclaimed in public that his definition of faith is not the same as what scriptures proclaims and teaches.

(Faith:Not Maybe, I Am, Part 1, at :50)
“I don’t like the definition of faith in Hebrews 11 because it doesn’t make sense to me, even though I know what it says.”
Mr. Bohi then goes on to give his definition of faith.  “ My definition of faith is a two letter word… :to”.  I believe we are being transformed from glory to glory.  We all experience glory…”
Mr. Bohi seems to be setting aside what Hebrews 11 teaches about faith, does not accept it, and substitutes his own special definition of faith.  Are we not to have faith in what God’s word says?



Responding to The Voice
Dan Bohi preached a message about living in the voice, available here: http://crossroadstabernacle.sermon.tv/Sunday_Morning_Messages/8543486 You may listen and verify what I report.
Some of what Dan says and the way he says it merely reflects a less formal presentation. That, in and of itself, is not necessarily a problem; stilted, over-formalized, and lifeless sermons bother me more. The content, not the delivery, of this sermon is what I will concentrate on. I will note my concerns in the order they occur in the message, if you wish to follow along.
Dan leads off by saying faith is hearing and obeying. He also states, correctly, that faith comes by hearing. Faith comes by hearing, it is not hearing. Obedience is an action taken because of faith. I do not disagree that if you are faithful, you will hear and obey; I disagree with calling these distinct things the same. This distinction can and should be made clear, even in a less formal presentation from a pulpit.
Dan compliments the congregation. He tells them while some churches require spoon feeding, they are ready for a buffet. Remember this statement when the sermon wraps up in another two hours.


We are told Moses became the greatest deliverer of the old covenant by hearing and obeying. Moses was the deliverer because he released the prophetic word of God. Dan does say these things were not things Moses could have dreamed up, but he tells us they did not show up until Moses released them with his voice. They did follow in time, after the proclamations by Moses, but it was God who released them, not Moses. Moses did not cause the plagues to happen by his voice.
Later, when the people fear God and tell Moses, they were content to get their information “second-hand,” we are told this desire for another person to be an intermediary is at the base of Judaism, Catholicism, and Protestantism. Really? Luther proclaimed the priesthood of believers.
In keeping with releasing the prophetic word, we are told the shrink back in Hebrews 10:38 means to fail to declare. Within context, the verse speaks of shrinking back from fear of what may happen to you if you live as a professing Christian. Not proclaiming your faith is more to the point, rather than not releasing God’s prophetic word.

Next, we are told it requires both the written word and the prophetic word to
glorify Christ. Keep in mind, the way prophetic word is used, this is saying it requires the
written word and prophets releasing miracles into being to glorify Christ. We are told of
Elijah releasing the word of God. We are told to hold on during trials because, if we do,
we will see greater power and miracles released.
Then, we are informed everybody has to have a history with God in the secret
place. We are told there are no shortcuts; people want shortcuts, they want laying on of
hands, but we have to have the time in secret. (This comes up again later.) Dan says
Jesus only had a ministry for three years because the rest of the time was spent in the
secret place with His Dad. Dan says Psalms 139 talks of God forming us in “the secret.”
Psalms 139:13 For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother's
womb. The unseen formation of the child in the mother’s womb is declared, not the
secret place Dan tries to propose this verse teaches.

Dan is not a medical doctor, nor am I, but the statements about healing a man
with a cancerous liver sound questionable. I do not deny God can or does heal liver
cancer, but consider the report. The man had 37 tumors on the liver and was expected
to die that week. When Dan touched him, his pain was gone. A follow up at the Mayo
clinic, showed no tumors remained. But then we are told a DNA scan was done on the
liver, and the DNA was different, the man had a new liver.
Questions: Why was a DNA scan done? Why on the liver itself and not a simple
cheek swab? Is it possible to have that many separate tumors on the liver
simultaneously? DNA can detect genetic markers that indicate predispositions to certain
cancers, did Dan mean to say these markers were gone? But again, why take the DNA
from the liver? A biopsy is the more likely procedure.
We are told if a Christian does not listen to God and obey, Satan can handle him
completely.

Dan intermingles 2 Chronicles 5:13 and Acts 2:2 He mistakenly says it is in Acts
where a cloud fills the house of the Lord. Acts refers to the house where the 120 were
waiting, not the house of the Lord.
We are told God wants to engrave His name on us. We are told Jeremiah 31:33
is the same as Isaiah 49:16 and 2 Corinthians 3:2-3. Judge for yourself.
Jeremiah
"But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,"
declares the LORD, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I
will be their God, and they shall be My people. Isaiah "Behold, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands; Your walls are continually before Me. 2 Corinthians You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. God writes on our hearts in the first text, He engraves us in His palms in the second, it is the Corinthians who are the letter in the third. Dan says God wants you to be a prophet and calls a woman in the crowd a prophet. Dan claims the Acts gathering started with the 520 witnesses to Christ’s resurrection and dwindled to 120 through people dropping out who were not willing to pay the price. I don’t find support for that in the first two chapters of Acts.
Dutch Sheets is mentioned to support the concept that Elijah was “birthing” the rain when he prayed for rain to return after a three year drought. We are told Elijah had his face between his knees (Scripture so states), but Dan includes he was grunting and groaning birthing the rain and embarrassing his assistant. I Kings 18:42-45 has the account. John 7:38 is tied in to further support birthing. We are reminded John says “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his koy-lee-ah shall flow rivers of living water.” Dan replaces the word belly from the KJV with the Greek word koy-lee-ah and says it means womb. Koy-lee-ah is the root form of the word used. The actual word is koy-lee-ahs, κοιλίας. It occurs seven times in this exact form in the New Testament. In six of those times, it is rendered womb, as in Luke 1:15, "For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb.” The word is a generalized term which can denote any abdominal organ. Context determines its proper translation. It is disturbing that Dan will take Psalms 139 which does refer to womb, and make it a secret place, and here, where the clear translation does not fit his purpose, he will inject the word womb where it does not belong. The only purpose is to promote a Gnostic God willing to give secrets in secret places.

This was the end of the delivery of the message on the voice. What followed was a thirty minute talk on miracles that was supposed to be ten minutes. Dan mentions a service where “everybody” was healed. Later we find it was everybody that requested healing; still impressive sounding, but far different from what the first statement seemed to indicate. Several of the “healings” were people simply saying they were. There is a story of a lesbian being healed, but apparently not saved, or delivered from lesbianism. Remember Dan earlier said there were no shortcuts. Now, he relates doing an impartation service. Impartation is the belief some people are gifted to lay hands on others and give them the Holy Spirit and gifts for the five-fold ministry. The five-fold ministry refers to God raising up Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers. If there are no shortcuts, why does Dan admit using them? Dan speaks of a twelve year old girl who he “saw” had been raped and abused. He says God was going to take away her memory of the abuse, she would not remember it. Later, she reportedly says she can’t remember her abuse. Yet why does she remember she was abused? Only the details are gone; that sounds like normal suppression of trauma. After all the talk of miracles someplace else, Dan comes in for a landing. He says the church he is in is like home, and it’s harder to do things at home. So, no healings will be attempted here. This church, that at the beginning was ready for a buffet, is told they need to get ready to be able to receive healings. This church, so like home, and ready for filling, is not as ready as a sinful woman, apparently left in her sin, to see healings. Dan says this church so ready for filling has a number of relational problems, some very fragile and hanging on by a thread. The call is limited to people having one of several generic issues guaranteed to be in a crowd of any reasonable size. The issues: Those going through a transition, those who have messed things up, those with bitterness, those afraid to step out in faith. Not that these are not real things to pray about and commit to God, but Dan comes in with a bang and leaves with a whimper. Dan ends with saying he doesn’t have a clue what he’s doing, he’s just trying to follow the voice. I’d say that means he’s following the wrong voice. end of article

My notes I went to as well as contacted the Mayo clinic since that number of tumors should be a record.
No record on hand of that situation . Keep in mind hippa law plays into this but that number of tumors would have been a record plus Dan has a bad record of coming clean with information on the medical miracles he performs. Take for instance when Dan claimed to have raised the dead.

  Claims of People Being Raised From The Dead
Quote: “I prayed for a man. My brother and I were in revival in Coffeeville, Kansas… and we prayed for a man who was dead… and he came back to life. I prayed for a man when I did a revival at the Roy Clark Theatre in Branson… and he came back to life. I prayed for a man in Olathe, Kansas at a Tuesday night revival service at 9:04 pm… and he came back to life. I haven’t raised 600, like Heidi and Roland.. but I’ve done three because I’m a Nazarene and a Nazarene always has three points.” (laughter)
Source (2:40: Faith, Not Maybe: I Am, Part 2)
His reference was to Heidi and Rolland Baker who are involved in missionary work in Africa, and whose blog is full of stories about miraculous raisings from the dead, instantaneous healings, visions of the Lord, and many signs and wonders.  This is very disturbing, not only the raising from the dead claim without any solid documentation to prove such a serious claim; but also his apparent connection with, or at least knowledge of the Bakers, whose outrageous claims of raising many from the dead include an example in this story (Back From The Dead), which as far as I know, has no substantive proof behind it.
In another sermon, (10:27) in which he also says he prayed for a lady and her leg grew two inches, Mr. Bohi said:
“We prayed three times in our services for people that had been raised from the dead.  I don’t feel comfortable about that, ‘cause I’m a Nazarene.  And I don’t like to disrupt people and I probably wouldn’t pray for them if I knew they were dead but these people were dead and they came back alive.”
Mr. Bohi is again claiming miraculous raisings from the dead.  Is there any documentation of these occurrences?  Is there any proof?  I myself could claim this, and would you not want evidence of such a miracle?  And again, his mention of the Bakers, implying that he knows them and approves of their ministry, is very troubling.  His favorable mentioning of Bill Johnson is also troubling to me.