T.D.Jakes

How so? I am no fan of T.D. Jake, but since when does the Trinity come up in the gospel. I believe in the Trinity but the gospel does not even mention the Trinity. Are you saying that a person has to understand the Trinity to be saved?
The gospel is not any old thiung we want to make it or add to it. Here is the gospel;

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
No Trinity understanding needed.

 

That would be good to have good debate. But please, leave the context in when quoting me?

 

After reading this attack on my abilities, and accusing of brushing aside, and more, I'll more than gladly have to take a pass on a reply.


- Blessings

 

No, I think it is becoming evident that you do this when you are stumped to save face. The person to whom you are referring did not say anything that would warrant a "pass on a reply". It is clear that you pass it up because you must.

 

I have first a comment than a question. I agree with you freeatlast. I do not believe that it is necessary to understand the trinity to be saved. Like you said the gospel is very specific and we cannot add to it. That being said, let me move to my question. In this discussion about T.D. Jakes we are not debating his salvation or not, we are debating if he could legitimately be called a false teacher and if so does the Biblical admonition to avoid false teachers apply? I am not questioning his salvation, I am saying that by denying the doctrine of the trinity he is definitely exposed as a false teacher and should be avoided. He probably does get somethings right, but he is a false teacher.

 

And you would be wrong on both counts.

First of all, "legalism" refers to adherence to the law or to works to obtain salvation. I never said, nor do I believe, anything of the sort.

Second, our doctrine and practice is nothing like Westboro Baptist.

How so?

...says the guy who just called me a legalist and compared me to Fred Phelps.

Seriously, how did I slander you?

If you're that concerned about it, please do.

Actually, God has already taught us these the truth regarding these things in the scripture verses and passages I've cited for you throughout the thread.

 

Same answer I gave last time you asked me.

 

No, they're not false teachers.

 

One problem here. I don't care what you think. And hopefully, you don't care what I think, but are objective about it. I care what the Word says on the matter. Your opinion is subjective and fallible. It is also very shallow and there is no support from you that their doctrines are correct in light of Scripture. Only a subjective "they're not false teachers." Based upon what? You.

Herein lies the fallacy, your illogical logic, and shows how it is immersed in subjectivity: (by your implication) "I know charismatics. They are nice people. They will get more rewards than me. They do good works. They are my friends. Thus, they are not false teachers." That is so wrong. We could also apply this refusal to compare their doctrine to Scriptures, and false logic logic to JW's, and instead only make a conclusion based upon a subjective friendship with such, and outter appearances, and their works, and conclude thereby, "No, they're not false teachers". Until we look at what their doctrine is (teaching) and not life (outer appearance) we will never ever be able to determine whether or not what they teach is false.

They most certainly are false teachers. In every sense of the term. Scriptures support this, as I have given and alluded to.

The following doctrines are false teaching, making those who espouse such, and teach such, themselves, false teachers:


Word-faith is false doctrine. Extra-biblical revelation is false doctrine, and is always theologically incorrect. Slain in the spirit is false doctrine. Claiming apostleship is false doctrine. The Gospel of gain is false doctrine, a la prosperity Gospel. Their entire teaching on faith, is false doctrine, a la if you're sick, poor, or suffer, or otherwise, it is your fault, and is a false representation of true Chrisiianity, a la God is a genie. (If only the martyrs and apostles who suffered for centuries new these truths, they aoule have word-faithed away the flames, and climbed down off of those stakes, and embraced those Catholics, and their doctrine, and voila!!! we'd have all the answers!) Tongue teaching is unscriptural. They embrace Kenneth Copelands theology, Benny Hinn theology, Jerry Savelle theology. All three charismatically aligned, and all three are false teachers.

There is much much more on this. Not all, but many charismatics embrace these doctrines, and teach them, and many many more. Oh, but how they present themselves as wolves, but in sheeps clothing. "See, I'm really really nice, don't believe what they say about me." wink wink.

Wake up.


Perhaps you're a charismatic? Perhaps you should teach their doctrines to your people, in whatever capacity that is.

 

I think if that Ole Boy screams & sweats anymore he is going to have a heart attack & I sure as heck wouldnt want to be one of his pall bearers (He's a Big Ole Boy) LOL!

 

First of all, I haven't provided any support because I really don't care whether or not you believe me. You don't know these men and if I told you what they teach, you probably wouldn't believe me, anyway.

I'm sorry, but in twenty years, I've never heard them teach or preach anything that would mark them as false teachers.

Perhaps you could show some evidence of their teaching that would make them false teachers.

Agreed.

I've never heard any of these men teach this, but even if they did, it would not rise to the severity of false teaching. It could be a bad practice, an Unbiblical practice, but it still isn't an essential doctrine.

Agreed.

Yep.

Who is "they"?

While I don't believe in the perpetuity of tongues, it's a non-essential.

Again, who is "they"? Is it possible that you're confusing charismatics with WoF adherents?

OK. So then if you admit that not all charismatics believe these things, then what about those who don't?

Perhaps you should read my posts. I've explained dozens of times that I am a cessationist and do not believe in the perpetuity of these gifts.

 

Nope. I wouldn't believe you. That's too subjective. Objective proof has been given.


Herein lies the fallacy, your illogical logic, and shows how it is immersed in subjectivity: (by your implication) "I know charismatics. They are nice people. They will get more rewards than me. They do good works. They are my friends. Thus, they are not false teachers." That is so wrong. We could also apply this refusal to compare their doctrine to Scriptures, and false logic logic to JW's, and instead only make a conclusion based upon a subjective friendship with such, and outter appearances, and their works, and conclude thereby, "No, they're not false teachers". Until we look at what their doctrine is (teaching) and not life (outer appearance) we will never ever be able to determine whether or not what they teach is false.

Your ministry is subjectivity based, not Word centered and objective. This is why you embrace false doctrine and cannot dscern it.

You won't address the list of teachings, because you can't nor won't face truth.

That's all from me.

- Have a good one!!!

 

Then there's no point in wasting my time, is there?

Actually, I never said nor believe anything of the kind.

Again, you're being dishonest.

I have compared their doctrine to scripture. In fact, not only I, but for the past several years, we've been a part of a group of about twenty pastors, teaching elders, and evangelists who meet regularly. When we meet, we take turns sitting in the hot seat and literally everything we've taught or preached in the previous weeks is gone over with a fine toothed comb.

In all of the years we've been doing this, I can't recall anything that's ever come up as far as they're concerned that was false.

Agreed. Did I say anything about their lives or have I been talking about their doctrine? Clearly, I've been referring to their doctrine all along.

Actually, our church has a very strong reputation as a Word centered, Bible teaching church.

And yet, when I ask you what false teachings I've embraced, you're unable to name any.

Actually, I did address them in my last post to you. In fact, I even told you that I agree with you that several of those things are false doctrines.

I believe I've been very respectful to you, in spite of your repeated and increasingly hostile attacks toward me, but this time, you're making some very serious charges that you have provided no evidence for.

Frankly, I find you to be a liar, a hypocrite, and a slanderer. Not only have you repeatedly lied about me and my church, you have slandered me, my church, and four Godly men whom you don't even know, and after doing all of that, you threatened to report me for slandering you, even though you could not give any examples of slander, and even though you have repeatedly slandered me.

Not only is your conduct unbecoming of a preacher, but the Bible says that your conduct is grossly disobedient and may even be evidence that you're not saved.

I would strongly encourage you to repent of your behavior and to seriously and thoughtfully and prayfully examine yourself and what your behavior says about your standing before God.

 

I have Pentecostal friends who are some of the most sincere, loving, Christlike Christians that I know. By the life they live there is no doubt of their love for their Lord and His people. We don't argue the charismatic stuff when we're together.

In no way would I classify them as heretical or false teachers. Wrong on several points, but never false teachers.

 

I lied? Where? You better have a real proof of this. I don't take that accusation or slander lightly. You should be ashamed of yourself. Out of all my sin, that is one thing I definitely do not engage in.

Are you on an all out attack because I thoroughly exposited this thing?

You've compared their doctrine to Scripture? All of them, and all of them are OK? Unreal. All the list I gave are false teachings.


Repeated and increasingly hostile attack by me? Repeatedly slandered you? Name them and use quotes. This is pure emotionalism and no has no basis.


I'm glad you said all of that about me, and not me, about you. Everything I addressed was based upon your implications and what you said.

I don't care that you all out called me names, unsaved, and all of that. I've never accused you of such, nor your men, as you say, only that your assessment of charismatics is purely subjective. The one who has slandered is you, friend.

I am truly sorry you cannot look at this objectively, and in turn, attack.

I don't believe your assements, because they are yours.

You have really got to calm down, friend and stop the name-calling. It doesn't become you.

And I will go and examine myself.

 

Actually, I believe I was very respectful to him, in spite of his repeated and increasingly hostile personal attacks and all of the false accusations he brought against me, my church, and four very Godly men.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe it's sinful to point out that somebody has told a lie.