Theophostic Prayer Ministry

Ed Smith, who launched Theophostic Prayer Ministry in Campbellsville, Ky., in 1996, says Theophostic facilitators "ask the Lord to reveal His truth" as clients "watch for, listen [to] and feel" a special revelation from Jesus, who "has the ability to enter into our historical moment and reveal truth in the experience."1 The TPM facilitator then declares that the source of the revelation is actually Jesus.
"During Theophostic Prayer Ministry, demons sometimes masquerade as Jesus, appearing visually in people's minds looking like Jesus," (Where in the Bible does Jesus appear to us visually before the 2nd coming?) warns Smith. But, don't be alarmed by this, he says, as it's easy to spot the demonic imposter (they are all demons appearing as angels of light).2 "I have found that when a person looks carefully at the face of a demon ‘Jesus,' it will usually be dark or hazy, or look angry, scornful, or evil."3 (You cannot detect a demon just by the way it looks. Jesus only detected Satan who came to him as an angel of light and tempted him in the Wilderness by the Scriptures "It is Written".) Smith also warns against all forms of channeling or divining the future using TPM, because he admits that facilitators have used it for divination.4
In TPM, truth is defined by how it feels, and Smith elevates a mystical encounter with Jesus over teaching and discipleship. He warns of "clutter"5 that can hinder TPM, which includes logical thinking, because this will interfere with receiving truth.6 
Logical thinking"clutter" interferes with recieving truth? Is this why new age meditation blanks out the mind, to recieve truth and enlightenment? 
In Smith's thinking, the mystical method must take place before teaching, insight, and encouragement can have any effect on the person's emotional distress. Smith says: "As Christians are released from their lie-based thinking, they will be better able to appropriate the biblical instruction they receive through other cognitive venues....We need to experience the freeing presence of Christ in our lives so that we can absorb the Word of God and be changed by it."7 
Smith claims that a feeling of peace validates the entire mystical experience as being from God, and this "Peace rarely, if ever, comes via the cognitive instruction of the facilitator/counselor. If cognitive truth resulted in peace, our churches would be full of peace-filled people."8 
COGNITIVE, a. Knowing, or apprehending by the understanding.
Cognitive Truth = A Knowledge of Gods Word. So a Knowledge of Gods Word does not bring Peace. 
In Smith's view, preaching, teaching, and discipleship-non-mystical means of receiving God's truth-do not enable believers to fulfill Col. 3:15's command to "let the peace of God rule in your hearts...." However, this verse follows Paul's commands in the previous verses to "set your affection [to exercise the mind] on the things above"; to "mortify [subdue] therefore your members which are upon the earth" and "put on...mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; Forbearing one another...." Smith claims that these cognitive activities are useless in obtaining the peace of Christ. 
In his 2005-revised training manual, one of Smith's original nine Theophostic principles-"God heals the lost and saved equally with no preference over either"-quietly disappeared15 Smith says of TPM, "People consistently say it was from God. This is even the case with those who do not profess any relationship with God."16 And, later he says, "God does not seem to require confession of sin from a nonbeliever."17
But how can a lost person have the "peace of Christ"-that which Smith defines as the end result of Theophostic healing? If a lost person can have it, and claims that God showed it to him, then it's not the peace of Christ: it's a false gospel! If a lost person gets a word of truth from Jesus without repentance, it's a false Jesus!
Smith has consistently shifted his terminology, switching from "genuine recovery" to "genuine renewal," and repackaging his concepts to stay ahead of critics, and also to ensure that TPM remains appealing to conservative churches. Don't be fooled by cosmetic changes! Theophostic Prayer Ministry's core premise18 continues to promote a false Jesus and a false gospel. (Jan Fletcher is a Christian journalist who has reported on TPM since June 2003. 
Ed M. Smith, Basic Seminar Manual (2005), New Creation Publishing, 137-138. 
http://www.thebereancall.org/node/2788 

TheoPhostic Counseling: Divine Revelation or Psychoheresy?
The following is a brief description of TheoPhostic theory and practice: Present problems are due to past (usually
early-life) events, early interpretations of those events (“lies”), and their accompanying emotions. The “lies,” which
drive present thinking, feeling, and behaving, are embedded in early-life memories, located in the “dark room,”
which must be accessed through “drifting” into the past in search of early “memory pictures” that feel the same as
the negative feeling accompanying the present problematic situation. During this search, the client is encouraged
to find Jesus and describe what he is doing and saying.
Once the memory holding the “original lie” has been located, the therapist must identify the “lie” (e.g., “I’m bad,”
“It’s my fault,” “I’m worthless”). Then comes “stirring the darkness,” which involves having the client repeat the “lie”
over and over again to intensify his emotions and prepare him to hear God speak “truth” directly to him, thereby
replacing the darkness with “light.” Beyond Tolerable Recovery: Moving beyond tolerable existence, into genuine restoration and emotional inner healing. TheoPhostic Counseling by Ed M.Smith.

IMPORTANT ALERT: THEOPHOSTIC HERESY GAINING POPULARITY 
Please note founder Ed Smith's original claims:

"...over the course of the next few weeks a simple yet profound principle began to emerge. It was as though a spigot had been turned on and the insight of this process began to flow through my mind." - Ed Smith; Beyond Tolerable Recovery. TheoPhostic Counseling p. 30

"After I had searched long and hard for that 'better' method, He [God] gave me TheoPhostic so I would have no room to boast." - Ed Smith; Beyond Tolerable Recovery. TheoPhostic Counseling p. 31

"Theophostic Prayer Ministry is not new in concept only in intention. God has been operating on these same principles though out history."" - Ed Smith; Healing Life's Hurts Through TheoPhostic Prayer (Newly Revised Edition, 2005) p. 10.

TheoPhostic counseling "is not a spin-off of any other traditional approach to counseling." - Ed M. Smith; Breakthroughs in Biblical Counseling and Genuine Inner Healing. (FAX regarding TheoPhostic Training Seminars Campbellsville, KY) p. 4.

Now, PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING: Ed Smith (founder) himself, who originally came out saying boldly that his teaching was directly from the Holy Spirit and did not contain any secular inner-healing methods, has since amended his own training materials admitting the former error/untruth (proving that those mindsets have in fact influenced his doctrine - note the following quote):

"Previous editions of this manual are now out of date and no longer represent the current teaching of this ministry... I came from an eclectic background that included some of the very practices that I now reject." – Ed Smith, in his new Basic Seminar Manual

This is VERY important: Even though Ed claims to have now amended his former errors (yet again), which we would hope is a good thing, it should be pointed out that these "former errors" were once touted by the very same man as being the instruction of the Holy Spirit and not the product of any New Age inner healing method or outside influence. He proclaimed this in live seminars and in written teaching materials! I repeat, this man once proclaimed to thousands of people that the entire TheoPhostic principle and practice came by DIVINE INSTRUCTION - and now he claims that several elements of that very instruction are "out of date" and were influenced by practices that he now rejects and acknowledges as false!!! 
Ask yourself, what really is the credibility of a man who, only a short time ago, claimed emphatically that God directly gave him instruction, but who turns around in a moment (especially after he has been hit with a ton of scrutiny) and then says some of that very instruction was NOT from God after all and was inspired by false practices? Do you honestly believe you could trust a man like this? How would you really know if perhaps some of things he is still saying are "from God" are perhaps really from ungodly influences? Would you be able to still accept that he operates with any qualifiable, proven discernment of Truth at all? The evidence would lead most people to an obvious conclusion; Most likely not! This man clearly propagated error in the name of God! Facts are facts.

Let me just reiterate this another way... This man literally led thousands to open themselves up to techniques that were inspired by New Age and humanistic philosophy but told them these were from God and not from any other source!!! Regardless of whether or not you believe his intentions were good and maybe he made an honest mistake, you must at least acknowledge the fact that he did not speak the truth. He led people into error, claiming to be convinced of a certainty that God was leading him and that God directly gave him these practices! He persuaded people to trust his report and, inadvertently, accept false teaching.

Remember his original proclamation:"it was as though a spigot had been turned on and the insight of this process began to flow through my mind." But if he now admits there were errors in the original teachings that were not from God, then where was this "spigot of insight" actually flowing from? This is a vital question that every believer who has considered using these principles ought to strongly contemplate!

To further illustrate and emphasize how concerning this issue is, it is interesting how Ed has changed some of the other former accounts in his writings to distance himself from his prior claims of divine revelation. As you read earlier, he clearly said that God gave him the TheoPhostic method. The section from the book where this quote was taken has since been amended in Smith's newly revised book, Healing Life's Hurts Through TheoPhostic Prayer. Ed now claims, "I am not saying that I had a divine revelation, because I did not." (p. 18)

So, you decide... Is he lying or did he just forget?

The problem remains that details of the ministry's doctrine continue to be amended and there are large amounts of unbiblical and false teaching contained in the teaching materials still! Christians please beware! When asked who needs Theophostic prayer, Ed Smith's website boldly answered the question saying, "The answer is, all of us. Not one of us is exempt." #15 - Miscellaneous Questions (theophostic.com) 
http://www.truthforfree.com/html/article_theophostics.html 

Smith says, “I have been doing therapy in many different forms and settings for over twenty years” (p. 31).
During this period of time Smith confesses, “I believe He [God] wanted me to try every available method of therapy being offered in our country” (p. 31). Note the “every available method of therapy” and note the length of time, “for over twenty years,” and then think about the many people Smith subjected to ungodly forms of psychotherapy. Does that sound like something God would have someone do?
Smith refers to TheoPhostic counseling as given by God: “He gave me TheoPhostic so I would have no room to boast” (p. 31), and he says he has been using TheoPhostic counseling since February, 1996 (p. 142).
Before God blessed me with TheoPhostic counseling, much of what is in this book had never passed through my mind. As I was open to learning a new approach God began to pour this information into my mind. . . . I could not write down the new information fast enough to keep up with what God was saying to me (pp. 164, 165). (Bold added.)
TheoPhostic counseling is the result of many existent therapies, including psychoanalytic, Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), and cognitivebehavioral therapies. In addition, TheoPhostic includes elements from the inner healing movement, which includes guided imagery, visualization, and hypnosis. As a result of our analysis we conclude that TheoPhostic counseling came out of the evil cauldron of the perverted wisdom of men rather than from the mind of God.

Theophostics— Unbiblical Teaching Wedded to Mystical Experience
A key category in Theophostics is “lie-based thinking.” Smith defines lie-based thinking as thinking based on how one interpreted his or her first memory of an event that caused pain. For example, if a woman was sexually abused in childhood and then began to believe, “I am a shameful person and this is my fault,” that is “lie-based thinking.” Smith supplies dozens of examples like this. The point of Theophostic ministry is to have the "Holy Spirit" cause the memory to come back in a vivid, emotional way, and then subjectively reveal to the person what the truth is. For, example, the person might hear in his or her mind (not from the counselor), “it was not your fault, you are not shameful.” That revelation cures the person of lie-based thinking and the negative emotions go away instantly and permanently. Though this is supposedly a work of the Holy Spirit, it is evidently dangerous because Smith warns his readers that they need his training before they can be involved with it (Smith: 20).
It is important to understand that “lie-based thinking” as defined by Smith is not addressed in the Bible. This category has nothing to do with what the Bible teaches about “the lie” which is in opposition to the gospel. When Jesus said, “you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free,” he was referring to His objective teachings, not a mystical experience that changes one’s response to a childhood memory. There is no record anywhere in the Scriptures of a ministry that brings subjective revelations to a person’s past memory and then changes how they interpret the memory.
This citation will show how brazen Smith’s claims are: “Once the lies are removed from our experiential knowledge and we find perfect peace, we are in a place where we can appropriate the Word of God in our lives” (Smith: 113). This means that we need Theophostics or the equivalent first then we can understand and live out the teachings of the Bible. If this is right, then it is impossible for one to be a Berean and search the Scriptures to see if Smith’s claims are true. A person would have to first blindly submit to Theophostic counseling, get rid of his or her emotional pain stemming from first memory experiences and the resultant lie-based pain and then when sufficiently free from “lie-based thinking,” one could get something out of the Bible. 
Elsewhere Smith bristles at the fact that some people have written warnings about his teachings without first having gone through all the training (of course paying for it) and then watching the results (Smith: 138). He seeks to Teflon coat himself from correction by implying that all who disagree simply have not had Theophostic ministry or asked his permission to disagree (Smith: 137). That is like saying you would have to become a Mormon and experience what the Mormon church prescribes before you could discern if it is wrong or not. The Bible then cannot correct Theophostic teaching because those of us who study the Bible without having had Theophostic ministry are simply stuck in our cognitive “data base of truth” and cannot understand the Bible experientially. 
Billions of Clients/Victims 
The key idea in marketing is to create a need for your product in the mind of a potential client, the more clients the better. Smith has made the whole world population potential clients by claiming that any “lie-based thinking” is proof of our need for Theophostic healing (or something of the same ilk under another name). 
He asks, “Think over the last few weeks. Were there any moments in which you were frustrated, stressed, angered, worried, anxious, taxed, upset, fearful, hateful, argumentative, defeated, or pressured? If so, there was probably a lie at the source of these emotions” (Smith 95).
Other proofs are used to show that we are in bondage to “lie-based thinking” and need Theophostics: 1) if we do well 2) if we do badly. Those who do well are performance-based people trying to cover their pain. Those who sin overtly are acting out in their pain in an attempt to dull or escape it. If you are human and have emotions, you need Theophostics! If you say you do not, you are in denial. Smith writes, “Some of us deny and hide our lie-based thinking better than others, but we all need God’s truth to find healing” (Smith: 64 – remember that “God’s truth” in Theophostics is a subjective experience that reinterprets a memory; it is not the objective teaching of the Bible).
Let us consider the ramifications of the claim that everyone needs release from a condition that only Theophostics defines and cures. If indeed this condition is universal, then Smith has diagnosed nothing but “humanness.” He has not distinguished a particular category of people from others, just humans in general. Now if he is speaking of “humans in general,” then either he is describing the sin nature, or something innately human and not sinful. If not sinful we do not need a “cure” for it. If he is describing the sin nature and claiming that his particular process is the “cure for it,” he is preaching a different gospel. Theophostics cannot “cure” the sin nature. The only plan God has for sin is the gospel and the only plan He has for Christians to live out their lives is through the Biblical means of grace. [4] So Theophostics either is a false gospel, a false “means of grace,” or it is useless because it obviously cannot cure us from being “human.” I believe it is a replacement for what the Bible provides for us. Smith has defined the entire population of the world as “clients” that need his product.  

Theophostics & Subjectivism
Definition of Subjectivism: The Theory that holds that Personal Attitudes & Feelings are the sole determinants of Moral Values. That we cannot know everything, or even know anything for sure. Because everyone's mind is different everyone experiences events differently.
A major claim that underlies Theophostic ministry is as follows, “Yet what we feel reveals the truth about what we truly believe. Our emotions expose our core beliefs” (Smith: 52). This means that if one believes that he or she is secure in Christ based on the cross, the blood atonement, and what God has done for him by grace through faith, yet has feelings of insecurity for whatever reason, then that person does not really believe the gospel. One’s cognitive belief is proven invalid by his own feelings. Thus no Christian can be secure without the appropriate feelings.

Ed Smith says: We can choose to embrace logical truth in times of crisis, but generally we will submit to that which we “feel” is true rather that we “know” to be true. This is why people who administer Theophostic Ministry ask the person undergoing ministry what “feels” true, as opposed to what is true. What we feel is an indication of what we truly believe” (Smith: 82).

He teaches that feelings are the ultimate test of reality and that they trump any of our beliefs that are based on the objective teachings of Scripture.

He defines peace differently than the Bible does. He is speaking of a lack of emotional pain as he makes clear throughout his book. The Bible defines peace more in terms of being right with God than a lack of emotional pain. Does the Bible ever teach that we have to feel forgiven to be forgiven, or feel loved to be loved, or feel secure to be secure? No it does not!

The subjectivism of Theophostics would put Christ and the Biblical writers in need of Theophostic ministry. For example, when Jesus said, “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me” (Mark 15:34), according to Theophostics Jesus feeling the wrath of the Father against sin was revealing His true belief, i.e. that He was indeed forsaken by the Father. Jesus did not ask why the Father rejected the sins of the world (which the Son was bearing), he asked “why have you forsaken Me.” In His humanity Jesus felt forsaken and cited the first verse of Psalm 22. In quoting that verse He identified with human sufferers through history who felt forsaken by God though they believed in Him. David trusted God yet felt forsaken.

However, Smith claims, “As much as we would like to believe otherwise, our emotions will always expose what we truly believe” (Smith: 52). This is contrary to Biblical fact. Job had many negative emotions, but still believed that God would vindicate Him.

Consider this lament Psalm: “How long shall I take counsel in my soul, Having sorrow in my heart all the day? How long will my enemy be exalted over me?” (Psalm 13:2). The Psalmist was filled with anxiety and negative emotions. However, consider how the Psalm ends: “But I have trusted in Thy lovingkindness; My heart shall rejoice in Thy salvation. I will sing to the Lord, Because He has dealt bountifully with me” (Psalm 13:5, 6). David’s faith gave him hope despite his feelings.

Smith repeatedly denies that this is appropriate and chides those who do so. He rebukes those who trust God’s promises in the midst of sorrows, saying, “We stand and proclaim ‘Victory in Jesus’ and ‘Standing on the Promises,’ while we live in secret defeat and emotional bondage. We call abstinence from sinning victory, when it is not” (Smith: 96). So, if we are in emotional pain (which Smith treats as if it were sin itself), yet stand on God’s promises and even abstain from sinning while doing so, we are nevertheless defeated! What a horrid disservice to all the righteous sufferers throughout history, including the Biblical ones. Paul said, “I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart” (Romans 9:2). He fails Smith’s test miserably. Does the Bible promise to take away all emotional pain now, before the return of Christ? No!

Smith teaches that if we feel emotional pain we cannot forgive: “If we try to forgive while we are still feeling the pain of the offense, forgiveness will be impossible” (Smith: 126).

This means that we have to be cured of all emotional pain first before we can obey God and forgive. The subjective (our feelings) trumps the objective (the command to obey). This is the case with nearly everything in Theophostic ministry. We have to get Theophostic ministry first before we can do what is pleasing to God. When Jesus was in the midst of the pain (both physical and emotional) of Calvary, He said “Father forgive them for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34). He forgave while feeling the pain of rejection and hatred. Stephen did the same (Acts 7:60).

Therefore, in his view, now that we are Christians we are no longer sinners struggling with a sin nature. We already have a divine nature states Smith (misusing 1Peter 1:4) and we must be righteous or God would not live in our heart (Smith: 162). Thus being righteous should flow effortlessly out of our new nature, since sin has no power over us (Smith: 116, 117).

http://so4j.com/theophostics-unbiblical-teachings-of-ed-smith-by-bob-dewaay.php