Ten Most Damaging Preachers

1. Finney, C.
2. Hinn, B.
3. Parsley, R.
4. Crouch, Jan (because paul parrotts her)
5. Swindoll, C.
6. Stanley, C.
7. The reast of the TBN bunch
8. Hyles, J.
9. Campolo, T.
10. Graham, W.

 

1. Everyone on TBN
2. Oral Roberts
3. Jimmy Swaggert
4. Robert Tilton
5. Jesse Jackson
6. Al Sharpton
7. Jim Baker
8. Mark Coppenger
9. Paige Patterson
10. J.N. Darby

 

1. Rod Parsley(false healings)
2. Jesse Duplantis(extrabiblical prophesy)
3. T.D. Jakes(doesn't believe in trinity)
4. Jim Bakker
5. Jimmy Swaggert
6. Oral Roberts
7. The Pope(is number one)
8. any woman preacher
9. Jesse Jackson
10.Benny Hinn(needs to quit covering up bald spot and extrabiblical revelations)

 

4 JBot,
Why do you have Paige Patterson as one of the most damaging preachers?

 

Was it him or Judge Paul Pressler who coined the phrase, "We are going for the jugular." when referring to the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC? I don't like what he and his cronies have done to the SBC. He is a Catholic in Baptist clothing. Isn't this the thread where we throw stones at the people we don't like?

Joseph

[ July 11, 2001: Message edited by: JBotwinick ]

 

4 JBot,

JB [I don't like what he and his cronies have done to the SBC.]

RR- What have they done?

JB [He is a Catholic in Baptist clothing.]

RR- Whaddya mean?

 

He went on a crusade to destroy the reputations of Godly men and women and changed this convention from a bottom up organization to a creedalsitic top down dictatorship. He has tried to shove the BF&M 2000 down our throats and make it a test for fellowship and employment. He is EVIL.

Joseph

 

I am not up to speed on SBC issues, so you'll have to coach me. When you say he has forced creeds on the SBC are you referring to the Bible Inerrancy issue? If not, what?

Do you believe that the SBC should condemn liberalism? By that I mean, those who deny the Diety of Christ, Blood atonement, Salvation by grace alone, the virgin birth, etc? What is your opinion of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship? (Isn't that the name of the split of angry moderates/liberals?)

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Roadrunner:
I am not up to speed on SBC issues, so you'll have to coach me. When you say he has forced creeds on the SBC are you referring to the Bible Inerrancy issue? If not, what?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am referring to the BF&M 2000 and how seminary employees were forced to sign this in order to keep their jobs.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Do you believe that the SBC should condemn liberalism? By that I mean, those who deny the Diety of Christ, Blood atonement, Salvation by grace alone, the virgin birth, etc? What is your opinion of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship? (Isn't that the name of the split of angry moderates/liberals?)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If that is your definition of liberalism, then yes, those ideas are definitely anti Christian and should be spoken out against. As a matter of fact, if you will take a look around on this board, you will see that I have in fact spoken against the false teachings of Gwen Shamblin, the TBN crowd and others.

The CBF is not a group of liberals. A lot of them, like me, are very conservative. They do beleive in the preisthood of all beleivers and soul competency, and are anti creeds. These are the main distinctions between the SBC and the CBF. Right now, I am a Southern Baptist who tends to agree more with the leadership of the CBF than I do the leadership of the SBC. If I find in the future that they do not reflect Christian beleifs, I will not support them.

Joseph

[ July 11, 2001: Message edited by: JBotwinick ]

 

Is the BF&M 2000 online anywhere?

 

Yes it is at the SBC website.

Joseph

 

Brother Joseph:

If you are conservative (as I know you are) you need to do a little more research into the CBF. At their recent yearly meeting they affirmed their denial of the unity of Scripture by claiming Paul's wrtings are not authoritative and error concerning women, homosexuality and other matters, as well as praying and singing to Mother God.

The CBF is heretical and unbibical, and has suckered in some well-meaning conservatives.
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=11248 http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=11234 http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=11243 http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=11235 http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=11228

 

JBotwinick,

I agree with your opinion of Patterson and Judge Paul Pressler. I find their forced creeds and attacks on Godly people repugnant. Here in Missouri we have a group called Project 1000 headed up by Roger Moran. They are preparing a creed for all Missouri Baptist state employees and appointees for this fall.

I disagree with you concerning the CBF. I don't feel that inclusiveness is always a virtue. They seem to.

I look for a new conservative convention to arise, probably out of Texas.

 

Chris,

Thank you for that information. You have already shared the accusation that they worship "Mother God". Longing to hold true to Biblical teaching, I chose to confront the President of the CBF, Daniel Vestal, privately and give him a chance to respond to the accusations instead of speculating and gossiping behind his back. Here is the initial e-mail from me and the response from Daniel Vestal in full:

Joseph, thanks for the letter. Let me assure you that CBF is committed to the triune God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is written in our mission statement. It is evident in our gatherings when we worship. I was in every service in Atlanta and not once was there a reference to "goddess" worship.

I do know that Baptist Press reported on the Baptist Women in Ministry meeting, which was auxiliary to CBF. There are over 50 auxiliary meetings at our General Assembly. I was not at the BWIM meeting, but was told that one speaker referenced God as being like a father and mother (Isaiah 66:13). The Baptist Press reporter then turned the remarks into something that was not at all what was said. I have talked to a number of women present and they were very upset by the false reporting of their meeting.

I hope this helps clarify. Again, let me assure you that CBF is healthy and viable in its witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Daniel Vestal

&gt;&gt;&gt; "Joseph Botwinick" &lt;[email protected]&gt; 07/05/01 04:22PM &gt;&gt;&gt;
Hello,

My name is Joseph Botwinick and I consider myself to be a moderate Baptist. I have always seen myself as having leanings toward the CBF view of things, but recently, have heard some disturbing reports concerning the organization. It has been reported that at the most recent convention in Atlanta, that your group encouraged goddess worship and and prayed prayers to "Mother God". Would you please clarify if this is true or if it is a misunderstanding? If it is a misunderstanding, would you please make very clear where the CBF stands on this issue? I want to stand in defence of the truth, but if this is where the CBF is going, I can't stand behind that. I do not feel very comfortable in the ultra extreme conservativism of the SBC. But I also do not feel comfortable at the ultra extreme liberal end of the convention. I tend to think that there are probably many people who feel like I do and are looking, but feel disenfranchised by both extremes.

Sincerely,

Joseph Botwinick

This seems to show that there is an inconsistency between what Baptist Press reported (You don't always beleive everything the media reports do you?) and whatt the CBF itself claims to have been the situation. Is there any other evidence that this accusation is true? Do you have a transcript of the meeting that we could look at and see for ourselves?

As to the other links, I haven't had a chance to look at them yet, but, I will. I will also continue to investigate the accusations to asscertain the validity of these reports. If I find discrepancies, I will ask for more evidence. If I am not provided with irrefutable proof, I am not going to condemn something that I am not sure about.

Joseph

 

1.T.D. Jakes (aka "Tellem what they wanna hear")
2.T.D. Jakes
3.T.D. Jakes
4.T.D. Shakes
5.T.D. Jakes
6.T.D. Jakes
7.T.D. Jakes
8.T.D. Jakes
9.T.D. Jakes
and last but least, too...
10.T.D. Jakes

 

ok you've had your fun now heheh

-dar

 

4 JBot,
I read the online version of the BF&M. I am trying to understand your complaints about the SBC. Is there something about the BF&M that you don't like, or are you opposed to any kind of 'belief test' (not sure what to call it.) Do you think it wrong for the Convention to weed out liberalism?

 

I am opposed to Catholic style creedalism. I am also opposed to the new statement which says that women should not be preachers and teaches an unscriptural one-sided submission which is degrading to the word of God and to women. I also oppose the fact that they did away with the line that says that the criteria by which we are yo interpret scripture is Jesus Christ. I am opposed to the fact that this document was used as a litmus test for seminary professors to keep their jobs. I am opposed to the fact that many seminary profs at SWBTS were either fired or resigned because they refused to sign a creed.

Joseph

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JBotwinick:
I am opposed to Catholic style creedalism. I am also opposed to the new statement which says that women should not be preachers and teaches an unscriptural one-sided submission which is degrading to the word of God and to women. I also oppose the fact that they did away with the line that says that the criteria by which we are yo interpret scripture is Jesus Christ. I am opposed to the fact that this document was used as a litmus test for seminary professors to keep their jobs. I am opposed to the fact that many seminary profs at SWBTS were either fired or resigned because they refused to sign a creed.

Joseph<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Joseph:

The Bible, besides the BF&M says that no woman may be a pastor.

The Bible teaches submission of the wife to the husband, and commands the husband to love the wife as Christ loved the church.

Jesus Christ is not the criterion by which we interpret Scripture, but rather Scripture is how we know Jesus Chriist.

Do you propose denominational jobs and seminary positions not expect adherence to a doctrinal standard?

No one was fired at SWBTS (or any other seminary) for not adhering to the BF&M. Some did willfully resign. During the controversy in the 80s many profs did resign, because they had signed the Abstract of Principles, but were teaching contrary to it, and were called on it.

Your characterization of the controversy is extrememly one-sided; were there no "evil devils" on the liberals side?

[ July 11, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]