I don't believe Joel is so much a false teacher as much as he is an incomplete teacher. It isn't that he is teaching a different Gospel but rather he is does not teach all of the Gospel.
Sounds weird, I know, but I dunno. I read 2 Cointhians 2 or Philippians 1 and I see Paul dealing with prosperity-esque teachers and he essentially says that while he disagrees with them that they are preaching the Gospel. For what its worth, the plain Gospel of Jesus Christ is presented at the end of every Lakewood service.
I know I've pretty much just stepped on a land mine around here...let's see how active it is. :)
Can you give specific citations on this, especially to show they were prosperity type preachers? If you are going to make a claim like this, at least give the references, please.
Just read Philippians last night, and I don't see where there were "prosperity" preachers as we understand them today.
Its hard to say as we don't have any record of what these other preachers were preaching.
17 For we are not like the many
who make a trade in God’s message for profit, but as those with sincerity, we speak in Christ, as from God and before God.
2 Cor 2:17 (HCSB)
15 Some, to be sure, preach Christ out of envy and strife, but others out of good will.
16 These do so out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; 17 the others proclaim Christ out of rivalry, not sincerely, seeking to cause me trouble in my imprisonment.
18 What does it matter? Just that in every way, whether out of false motives or true, Christ is proclaimed. And in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice 19 because I know this will lead to my deliverance through your prayers and help from the Spirit of Jesus Christ.
Phil 1:15-19 (HCSB)
It probably isn't Creflo Dollar style, but there is something there. :)
I cannot see where the Philippians 1 passage is prosperity preaching, but Paul does say he rejoices that Christ is preached even though out of a wrong intention. The 2 Corinthians 2 passage could allude to a prosperity type of preaching, but here I feel Paul condemns it, that is if you are speaking of verse 17. So it doesn't quite fit in that Paul would side with Osteen, IMO.
I'm not surprised at the Billy Graham comment about Osteen. He has gone down this ecumenical path as of late that is way to inclusive of false teachers.
She certainly knows women, she's all warm sounding, all wishy washy, and they relate, this is pitiful, and as long as she manages to relate, they think they've really gained soemthing form her.
I think this is probably true of most false teachers, they know their intended audience/victims well and know how to hit them to achives the desired goal.
You are being much too charitable.
Osteen's preaching of the gospel is not incomplete.
It is non-existent.
I have watched his Sunday telecast for years, waiting for a gospel message.
So far, nothing.
Tacking on some magic words to repeat at the end of the telecast hardly qualifies as gospel preaching.
Evangelical writer (and Presbyterian) Michael Horton wrote a book entitled Christless Christianity (see here).
In this book, Horton includes an absolutely scathing review of Osteen and his books.
Horton quotes many passages and interacts with them and this leads me to the conclusion that Osteen is, likely, not a Christian in the first place and he certainly does not preach any gospel that resembles true Christianity.
Thanks for providing this. I had a vague idea of what you meant but wanted to see the passages.
I don't think these are quite the same as the prosperity preachers but rather are preaching for money and feel they are rivals of Paul instead of fellow brother evangelists.
But the thing with Osteen is that he does not have a true gospel since he's WoF. I heard him preach at Easter once that Jesus died and went to hell to fight Satan. This is one of the WoF heresies. He said it real quickly, almost like he was hoping no one would notice, and then went on. This teaching goes against the atonement being complete at the cross.
Yeah, that is why I mentioned it is Creflo Dollar style, or Kenneth Copeland style, or modern prosperity style...but there is some correlation. I don't want to get bogged down on it, but the Greek here is pretty convincing that there were people preaching a prosperity-esque (or proto-prosperty) Gospel imho.
Well the Gospel is presented in every service. I don't care for his style or the inch deep spirituality in his messages. Yet I know a lot of people that have drawn closer to Christ through his ministry. I'm being generous, true, but I don't feel that I have the right to write a man off without knowing him in our celebritized culture.
Do you mean the fighting Satan part or the going to Hell after He died part? Just curious...;)
There is no doubt IMHO, that he is WOF. He is as polished as a used car salesman, and while he has inspirational messages, there is very little pertaining to sin, the need to repent, and how to repent.
I would consider him one of those to watch and learn from, so you can properly address the WOF crowd when they come to you and ask questions.
Of course, all of this is my opinion, and if Joel is in heaven, I'll be the first to apologize to him for any wrong words I've said about his ministry. I would just caution folks to be careful when it comes to his ministry.
I don't see how the Greek can be convincing on it when the prosperity gospel is very specific: Give and you will get more, sow your dollar and get thousands, God wants you to be wealthy, Jesus wore designer clothes, etc. Does the Greek indicate that? I doubt that this kind of preaching was around then.
Aside from that, more serious errors exist in these preachers like Osteen than just the prosperity message. The WoF teachings go much deeper than that and include heresies.
It's not a question of writing him off but of exposing him for what he is teaching. He himself said he does not talk about sin because it's "negative." He believe in only speaking positive things. That is not biblical at all.
The fighting Satan part, (though I do not think Jesus went to hell, but that was not my point). To say Jesus had to fight Satan in hell for 3 days to be born again so we could be born again is a heresy.
I listened to Osteen for a long time on TV and heard many false teachings. He says that how we think can affect outcomes. He gave a whole message once that about how you can bring about bad things by having a fear. He went from making a plant die (just by your thoughts) to a husband's wife who died because he was always afraid he would lose her. This is pure Word Faith, which comes from New Thought, something I am very familiar with as it is part of the New Age.
A few years ago ABC News profiled JO.
The story showed a sound bite from his mother Dody, who said her son purposely avoided preaching about sin and people's being lost.
He may very well hold an orthodox view regarding sin and guilt, but deliberately refuses to preach it.
I think it's obvious from his various interviews that he's not orthodox in even his views. How in the world he can "preach" *ahem* week after week and not be concerned over the state of mens' souls but only how they feel about themselves today is beyond me.
I saw him on 60 minutes (I think that was it) and he was at a book signing. He appeals to all religions because he doesn't take a stand on anything except you can have the good life now.