Hank Hannagraf?

[JeffM]

Just wondering what people think of Hank Hannagraf, the Bible answer man.

I usually tune in to him when I am going to work and for the most part, like what he says.

But there is something else about him I just can't put my finger on. He seems not to think to highly of ANYONE else out there and it seems he is guilty of what he accuses others of in regards to peddling his own books.

I do enjoy listening to his rants about TBN and these other TV Evangelist such as Meyers, Olsteen and Parsely because I agree with him. I won't question their Christianity, but I do think they deceive people.

Aside from that, is he talking the talk and walking the walk?

 

[massdak]

is his doctrine calvinist or arminian?

 

[JeffM]

Originally posted by massdak:
is his doctrine calvinist or arminian?

I don't know. He did say that his father was a Calvinist, but Hank said that some of Calvins doctrines are flawed. But unfortunately I can't expand on that anymore because I can't remember what he said.

For the most part, I like what he says.

 

[GeneMBridges]

I've looked at his website. He doesn't seem to take a stand one way or the other. He's more concerned with the evangelical essentials.

On his radio show, I've noticed that sometimes he's the non-answer man. He gets a question and doesn't answer the question. Instead he introduces a red herring and chases it or completely avoids answering the question altogether. I wish he'd just say, "I don't know," or "There are multiple views, here they are," than doing that. I've even been to seminary and think to myself, "Um, that's not the answer"...not that he gives wrong answers, but that he gives non-answers sometimes, which sometimes can be more confusing for the listener.

 

[Daniel David]

He is a flaming arminian. His logic is reduced to the hilarious: God is not a cosmic rapists line. I don't know of anyone who takes him seriously. He seems to think that because he did a little research on a topic, that he must be right.

 

[GeneMBridges]

Originally posted by Daniel David:
He is a flaming arminian. His logic is reduced to the hilarious: God is not a cosmic rapists line. I don't know of anyone who takes him seriously. He seems to think that because he did a little research on a topic, that he must be right.

Is there a graemlin for "flaming arminian?" I'm sure there's GOT to be something creative for it LOL.

Can you explain "cosmic rapists line?" I'm trying to figure that out. (BTW, I'm a Calvinist, so I'm not offended by your comments ).

 

[JeffM]

Daniel David,

Please explain what you mean.

I also want to say that since I've been here, I have become more confused about my Christian faith. I tend to find refuge in my Bible and in prayer after spending any length of time here on the BB.

People are so quick to speak so venomously against someone here without providing the reasons, even if they are valid reasons. Not only in this thread, but all over the place.

I am seriously dissapointed to say the least. I after spending years on secular forums, always defending my faith, I thought things would be different here....but sometimes it's worse.

Sorry to sound so harsh..and forgive me if I have upset anyone.

Jeff

 

[av1611jim]

Jeff;
Don't let it bother you too much. This is the modus operandi of many fellers here in the BB. Although they will TELL you that they are "standing for the truth", the reality is they are standing ON the brethren.

I have found that sometimes it helps to blast 'em right back and point out how they are doing the SAME things they are spouting against. Usually it shuts 'em up. But if not then just ignore them. There is an ignore button here.
Jim

 

[Chet]

JeffM

Hank Henegraff is not an Arminian. Those who make that claim don’t know what an Arminian even is. It is just their way of saying he is not a mainstream Calvinist. Hank does not believe in the fatalistic viewpoint that God is choosing an elect people for salvation. He understands the word elect to be speaking of Jesus in some cases. Regardless, his leanings are more Calvinistic in many areas – including eschatology. He seems to reject the pre-trib, pre-mill, dispensational theology, of which I believe, is biblical.

He has many Calvinist on his show, whom he embraces openly, e.g. James White. He even allows debates on his show for both sides, which is fair.

While he does expose the heresies of some within the Charismatic movement, especially those of the Word Faith sect, he does not believe in the cessationalist viewpoint, which I believe he is completely wrong. I believe the Bible clearly teaches that all the gifts of the Spirit have ceased upon the completion of the Scripture and the death of the Apostles.

He is very good with other cults such as Mormons; JW’s, etc… but does not classify Catholics as a cult. I do. He has made some statements of ecumenicalism toward the RCC.

He also has some “Hugh Ross” ideas about Creation. He seems to embrace the long earth idea, or at best has not made a conclusion publicly. I am a YEC, so this does not set well with me. I noticed you listen to Kent Hovind (which is good), but Hank does not like him either. For more info, I can PM you.

He has also come under fire with the way he handles his finances as well. For more info on this, I will PM you if you would like.

As far as Hank having a problem with everyone… that is the nature of his ministry. While I disagree with many of his “exposing”, he is good to listen to, as he does well with the major doctrines of the Bible. He does seem to talk over some people’s head, but then maybe some people should raise the bar intellectually? Sometimes I get really aggravated with his comments, and other times I am satisfied with them. But, either way we can learn information.


I would say this to you; I would encourage you to continue sticking with the Bible. Nothing will come close to your growing in grace, than the illumination of the Sprit through the Word of God. It will never lead you wrong. Some people here on the BB are here to “defend” what they have already made up in their minds. Few are here actually listening and learning.

Hope this helps somewhat…

 

[Mike McK]

I respect what he does and I think there's an important place and need for that in the church today.

I've found his books and essays to be well researched and thought out and his message is one that the church desperately needs to hear as more and more false teachers are creeping in to the church.

Now, all of that having been said, I find him to be a bit misguided in a couple of areas.

The first is that he's rude to many of his callers.

The second, and this is more a personal pet peeve than anything, is that he has taken the show so far from the great show Walter Martin built.

The third is that he has become as much a showman and salesman as those he warns against. Every commercial break includes a plea to buy whatever new book he's selling and every answer to a caller's question includes a reminder that, "this is further discussed in my new book..."

The fourth is that he has been involved in questionable practices regarding the financial aspects of CRI.

He has a lot of great and important things to say but, unfortunately, like the old saying says, "what he does speaks so loudly, I can't hear what he says".

 

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by Chet:
While he does expose the heresies of some within the Charismatic movement, especially those of the Word Faith sect, he does not believe in the cessationalist viewpoint, which I believe he is completely wrong.

Right. He is not a cessationist. In fact, he has stated several times that he attends a Calvary Chapel, which is a charismatic church.

He is very good with other cults such as Mormons; JW’s, etc… but does not classify Catholics as a cult. I do. He has made some statements of ecumenicalism toward the RCC.

While I don't consider Catholicsm a cult, in all fairness to Hank Hannegraaf, he has come down very hard on a lot of Catholic teachings and includes guests who constantly rail against the Catholic church, including James White, who you mentioned before.

 

[Marcia]

But he also has guests who are do not rail against Catholicism but rather give it a pretty evenhanded treatment, like Norm Geisler. Geisler's book, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences, is even recommended by some Catholics on the back cover, not because they agree with Geisler, but because they think he is fair to their beliefs in the book.

I think Hannegraf has a variety of people on the air -- Calvinists like White, "moderate" Calvinits like Geisler (yes, I know you Calvinists don't believe in that label), and other apologists like Lee Strobel, Greg Koukl, J. Budziewski (sp?), etc, as well as people like Joni Earickson Tada. His focus is apologetics, not one specific branch of Christianity.

 

[Pete]

I haven't heard Hank, read through the freebie articles on equip.org now and then though. Most sounds ok.

<--"flaming arminian"? (don't get , I would have used same pic if the phrase was "flaming calvinist"

)

 

[Daniel David]

Okay, his cosmic rapist line (which he says often actually), goes like this:

Caller: Hank, I love your show. I just think that this is such a good work that you do.

Hank: Thank you.

Caller: My question is about election. Does God determine who will be saved and who won't be saved?

Hank: Well, this is an in-house debate among many good Christians. This isn't something we have to separate over. We can furiously debate, but not divide.

Now, to the question, God is not some kind of cosmic rapist forcing people to love him.
___

Okay, this is what I am talking about. If a person's understanding of calvinism is that God is a cosmic rapist, then he is a moron.

 

[Jim W]

Originally posted by Daniel David:
Okay, his cosmic rapist line (which he says often actually), goes like this:

Caller: Hank, I love your show. I just think that this is such a good work that you do.

Hank: Thank you.

Caller: My question is about election. Does God determine who will be saved and who won't be saved?

Hank: Well, this is an in-house debate among many good Christians. This isn't something we have to separate over. We can furiously debate, but not divide.

Now, to the question, God is not some kind of cosmic rapist forcing people to love him.
___

Okay, this is what I am talking about. If a person's understanding of calvinism is that God is a cosmic rapist, then he is a moron.

Yep; a blithering heathen!

Jim

 

[Jim W]

That "cosmic rapist" line has been used by the "open theology" numb skulls that have popped up lately

 

[Major B]

The "Cosmic Rapist" comment is moronic on several levels. First, rape is not love, and the "part" of the rape victim cannot be considered love.

Second, God never saved anyone who was unwilling. He just changes their mind. "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power..." Ps 110:3

 

[Debby in Philly]

I like Hank for the most part. He is great with kids who call.
But he does occaisionally talk over the heads of some dear brothers and sisters in the Lord who call, who just need a simple answer to their question.
And I love listening to Lee Stroebel. He is something.

 

[Pastor KevinR]

I appreciate the way he exposes the likes of T.D. Jakes, Copeland, Hagin, Meyers, Hickey, C. Dollar, and other "Gospel of Greed" teachers. However when Christianity Today exposed his extravagance, I stopped sending C.R.I. money immediately!