Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Radioman2 | 85858 | ||
JOYCE MEYER 'NOT A SINNER '...For years, Charisma magazine has left a lot to be desired. Double standards, subjective journalism, mysticism, attacks upon historic and orthodox Christianity, and little regard for hermeneutics appear with frequency in the magazine. The issue featuring [Joyce] Meyer was no exception. 'Take, for example, the magazine’s slamming of those who have evaluated her theology: '“Joyce is not the subject of intense controversy, but she has faced her critics. Various cult-watchers have attacked her, including one who lambasted her on St. Louis radio and challenged her to a debate (which she refused).”1 'The “attack” to which Charisma alluded was the Dec. 7, 1995 edition of Issues, Etc. (KFUO 850 AM in St. Louis). The program was hosted by Lutheran Pastor Don Matzat and the featured guests for the show were none other than the authors of this article.2 Evidently, the magazine or Meyer herself surmises that a systematic and biblical analysis of her teaching (with primary documentation from her tapes and writings) constitutes an “attack” or assault of some kind. Paul commended Bereans, while the magazine castigates them. 'Matzat, himself involved in the Charismatic movement from 1971-1986, observed: '“Regarding the challenge, as I remember it, it was nothing more than an open invitation to Joyce to respond to our comments. Joyce did not avail herself of the opportunity to respond on the air.”3 'Like others in the Word-Faith camp who are uneducated, untrained and unskilled in doctrine and systematic theology, Meyer is none too eager to openly discuss the Christian faith with one who has worked hard to rightly divide the Word of Truth. ( . . . ) 'Meyer’s concept of sinless perfection is the most disturbing element to Matzat. Meyer has claimed, '“Now whether you like it or not, whether you want to admit it or not, whether you want to operate on it or not, you are made the righteousness of God in Jesus Christ. Most people who go to denominational churches never ever hear that! They never hear it! Never! All I was ever taught to say was, ‘I, a poor, miserable sinner.’ I am not poor. I am not miserable. And I am not a sinner. That is a lie from the pit of hell! That is what I were [sic] and if I still was, then Jesus died in vain. Amen?”5 'Meyer may be able to say she is not poor and not miserable. First John 1:8, however, would preclude the rest of her comments about not being a sinner. Paul thought himself to be the chief of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15). As Christians we are, after all, saved sinners. 'Meyer’s comments point out the real issue: Just who is lambasting whom? Meyer’s declaration clearly lambastes the theology of the Reformers, including, most notably, Lutherans and Calvinists. 'As noted in our previous Journal article, Meyer no longer distributes the above tape with her perfectionistic ideas.6 A staff member from her ministry told PFO that the message is obsolete. What is not clear is what part of or if the entire message is obsolete. One of its major themes on the tape is the “born again Jesus” gospel. Yet it can be shown that Meyer still distributes material promoting this heretical gospel, which certainly suggests that she does not see it as entirely obsolete (at least for the time being). 'Moreover, when one examines the now obsolete tape, divine intervention and direct revelation are stated as the source of her message: '“The Bible can’t even find any way to explain this. Not really. That’s why you’ve got to get it by revelation. There are no words to explain what I’m telling you. I’ve got to just trust God that He’s putting it into your spirit like He put it into mine.”7 'Having foolishly appealed to divine revelation and God’s impartation for the message, she now, in essence, has made God culpable for an obsolete message. Thus, one must ask, why does she continue to rely upon revelation knowledge when it produces obsolete messages and indicts God as the author of heresy? And how can the average listener discern which part of Meyer’s materials are biblical truth and which are destined for the trash heap of obsolescence? The caution of Zechariah 13:4-5 regarding false prophets who change their mind and their message bears consideration here.' ____________________ THE PREACHER WHO DOESN’T TELL IT LIKE IT IS: THE TRUTH TWISTING AND TALL TALES OF JOYCE MEYER by Paul R. Belli and G. Richard Fisher This is an excerpt from the article. To read more go to: (http://www.pfo.org/preacher.htm) |
||||||
2 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85867 | ||
Interesting, I am in agreement with the statement that I am the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus. I was a sinner, but now I am saved. Paul knew he was forgiven and made the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus. This message is not obsolete but a very present truth. If this is the best this writer can do to try and paint Joyce as a false prophet he is not doing a good job. As a matter of fact I am finding more fault with the few statements of the writer than with Joyce. "'Like others in the Word-Faith camp who are uneducated, untrained and unskilled in doctrine and systematic theology" What constitutes "educated, trained and skilled in doctrine and systematic theology?" Fishermen? or those that attend the Univiersities of the writers liking? If the authors of the doctrine were untrained, unskilled, and uneducated, then we have no right to demand such from the readers or preachers. The bereans searched the scriptures to see if these things were so. I recommend the writer of the article do the same. 1 Corinthians 6:10-11 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Timothy 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. 1 Timothy 1:16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting. 2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. 1 John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. All Joyce is saying, is that we are all sinners in the sense that we have all sinned, but if you are born again and a partaker of the divine nature you have escaped the corruption that is in the world through lusts, God does not look at you as a sinner but as Cleansed by the Blood of Christ and God calls you the righteousness of God in Christ. If God says that about me, who am I to argue against God and call myself a miserable sinner. Yes I was, and at times I feel like I still am, but I am not, I am a new man in Christ, born again and forgiven, my sins are removed as far as the east is from the west and Most born again saints do believe this. So if the writer thinks that those that dare call themselves the righteousness of God in Christ are false teachers, then he has condemned the whole church as I know it. This type of rhetoric, comparing Joyce with the false prophets of Zech 13 is as extreme as any extremism he accuses Joyce of. And so he will be judged with the same judgement he dishes out. His lack of grace toward a fellow saint only prooves his sainthood is questionable. His interpretation of what Joyce meant is in error. I have heard her preach many times that her teaching or any other teaching of man is not divinely inspired as the Word is. This writer is simply leaping on a poor choice of words to try and say Joyce is meaning something beyond what she said. This writer is Lutheran? My wife grew up in a Lutheran church, not trying to say they are all alike but the one where she grew up, she never knew anyone that was saved. When she was born again she had to leave the Lutheran Church. In the church she attended the Sunday School teacher taught teen girls it was ok to get abortions. I can get an idea why this pastor might be so surprised by this teaching. The church my wife went to knew nothing about being born again. They were sinners alright. Just as much as anyone else. They liked keeping their faith private and they did a good job, as far as she could tell they did not have any. I have hung around with Lutherans,and I have hung around with saints that attend Joyce Meyer's meetings. Give me the Joyce fans anyday, they are definitly saved and on the way to heaven. I could not see any fruit of that in the Lutheran Church. Don't be offended by my statements, they are simply the observation of one Lutheran Church (or a few others I have come in contact with in my life) I am sure there are some out there that are different. And my point is simply that I can find much more doctrinal error in the Lutheran Churches I came in contact with than in Meyer's. How about the Lutheran Pastor that tells a grieving couple he will not bury their baby because the baby was not baptized? Let us use righteous judgement and walk in Love. Someone asked about modern Pharisees or Scribes who are guilty of the error Jesus warned us against, I think it is these type of debate mongers, and cult watchers that fit the description. They strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. |
||||||
3 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Radioman2 | 85883 | ||
JOYCE MEYER JESUS IN HELL? 'The Charisma article indicates that another of Meyer’s critics, apologist Hank Hanegraaff, cited her booklet, The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make.8 Hanegraaff faulted Meyer for teaching that Jesus was born again in hell. Meyer responded by stating that she does not believe and has never taught that particular doctrine. 'Whether Hanegraaff ever used the exact words, “Jesus was born again in hell” or if the Charisma writer simply put those words in the Southern California apologist’s mouth in an attempt to build a “straw man” is not clear. What is clear, however, in spite of Meyer’s denials, is that in the fourth chapter of her booklet, The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make, she: '• Teaches a born again Jesus.9 '• Teaches that hell, not the cross, is where salvation was purchased.10 'She not only delineates and defines the heresy but she blatantly defends it. 'While Meyer may deny now that she has ever taught that “Jesus was born again in hell,” she has not renounced the teaching nor denounced those who teach it. Were she to do so, she most likely would neither have her picture in or on Charisma magazine again, nor would she be invited to speak with the heretics who do believe and teach it: her mentors and friends. 'Based on the content of her book, turning to Christ would be the most impotent decision one would ever make. By placing faith in “another Jesus” (2 Corinthians 11:4) as put forth in her booklet, a new “believer” would not be entitled to the new covenant purchased with Jesus Christ’s blood. Rather, the Jesus that Meyer proclaims, is a Jesus whose blood paid for nothing because his “blood was made of no effect,” being “treated as an unholy thing” (Hebrews 10:29), because according to this teaching, Jesus’ payment was actually made by suffering in hell. This teaching makes the “It is finished” of John 19:30 a lie. First Corinthians 15:3 is very clear: “Jesus was crucified and died for our sins,” not suffered in hell for our sins. 'Thus, Meyer refuses to debate and will not “comment directly on such opposition.” Is it any wonder that her husband remarked, “We let God respond” and “That’s not our position, to try and come back and straighten them out”? 'As noted above, neither Meyer nor her husband has the necessary theological training to defend her indefensible teachings. The only reason the Meyers can say that it’s not their “position” to respond and “straighten” us out is that they fail to grasp the basics of biblical interpretation and hermeneutics. As a result, it’s not that they won’t respond, it’s because they cannot respond. “Let[ting] God respond” is merely subterfuge. Strange how first-class, super-Christians, who would have us believe they are tapping into divine revelation, can do all things in Christ, except successfully defend their damnable doctrines of demons. 'As we read earlier, the Apostle Paul’s attitude was not to just let God respond, but to get into the trenches and do what God called him to do, namely to “cut the ground from under those who proclaim” another gospel. 'Even worse, their response gives this issue the sense of unimportance. Much to do about nothing! If it were, we would truly be wasting their time. Yet, those in apologetics ministries are keenly aware that this is an essential issue. Corrupting the Gospel produces heretical and damnable doctrine. Hence, we take heed to the Scripture’s admonition to “earnestly contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3). We should not, and cannot, do otherwise.' ____________________ THE PREACHER WHO DOESN’T TELL IT LIKE IT IS: THE TRUTH TWISTING AND TALL TALES OF JOYCE MEYER by Paul R. Belli and G. Richard Fisher This is an excerpt from the article. To read more go to: (http://www.pfo.org/preacher.htm) |
||||||
4 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85894 | ||
Gee I think Joyce and her Husbands response seems more Christ like. | ||||||
5 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Radioman2 | 85897 | ||
JOYCE MEYER WHAT IS REAL PROOF? 'Meyer says “that the changed lives are proof enough,” that she’s “anointed by God to do what I’m doing.”13 As is the Charismatic tendency, this is a subjective posture. Every cult and aberrational sect on the face of the Earth appeals to “changed lives” as a means of validating their claims that they represent God. Latter-day Saints, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and others all validate that they are “anointed by God” to do what they’re doing by virtue of “changed lives.” As such, her logic is as flawed as cult logic. Meyer needs something more concrete on which to base her claims. Remember, Christianity is based on facts, not feelings. Holy Ghost “goose bumps,” liver quivers or even subjective short-term change are not the confirmation of the Christian faith. 'Objectively speaking, her literature and tapes are “proof enough” that she is not anointed! Listening to her twists, turns and changes could only lead one to conclude that God is confused. Meyer’s appeal to have God’s blessing upon her ministry is questionable when one considers that God does not empower the vanguards of the Church to teach false and heretical doctrine. 'Sadly, when careful exegetes of God’s Word challenge her theology, she resorts to calling them “religious people” (pg. 55) who only criticize her for not being as well-educated as they are and then appeals to her “anointing” as proof that she is free to ignore them.' ____________________ THE PREACHER WHO DOESN’T TELL IT LIKE IT IS: THE TRUTH TWISTING AND TALL TALES OF JOYCE MEYER by Paul R. Belli and G. Richard Fisher This is an excerpt from the article. To read more go to: (http://www.pfo.org/preacher.htm) |
||||||
6 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85966 | ||
Ok I am bored now, in my opinion Joyce won the debate. :) | ||||||
7 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | EdB | 85970 | ||
Scribe That's not how I would call it. I think Radioman2 did more than amble job showing the fallacies of her teaching. I say well done Radioman!!! EdB |
||||||
8 | can a women preach and teach men | 1 Tim 2:12 | Scribe | 85978 | ||
Part 1 of 2 Posted below you will find some error from the Lutherans. It is as much error as the posts that have been given from Joyce or Kenneth Copeland. But I do not call the Lutheran Pastor who teaches this error a false teacher or a false prophet unless... He teaches that the baby goes to hell without this baptism. Then I would say it is false doctrine because then he preaches salvation through something other than faith in Christ alone, which is one of the other marks of a false teacher, one that denies Christ. If the redemption of Christ is extended toward this baby who cannot reason by virtue of baptism in the Luthern Church, then this redemption of Christ is extended to this baby who cannot reason without the baptism in water also or otherwise it is not the redemption of the supstitutionary sacrifice of Christ of which they are having faith in, because that reality stands whether the baby is baptized or not, so it either extends to babies or it does not. If on the other hand the Lutheran pastor believes this is biblical, but does not go so far as to say he thinks the baby goes to hell without it then I do not label him as a false prophet, only wrong, as he should label Joyce and Kenneth as wrong and not false prophets or teachers. WHY DO LUTHERANS BAPTIZE INFANTS? To begin with it should be noted that infant baptism has been practiced in the Christian Church as far back as we can trace. There appears to be no time in the history of the Church when infants were not baptized. In addition to this there is no trace in either the New Testament or the early Church of the Baptism of the children of Christian parents who had been brought up in the faith. It appears then that they were either baptized as babies or they were never baptized. What this means is that Lutherans really do not have to defend the Biblical, Holy, Christian and Apostolic practice of infant baptism, it stands on its own. The burden of proof lies with those who would abandon it. Presently we find a segment of Christianity which practices believers baptism. This group does not practice infant baptism but usually has some sort of consecration of the child to God. Lutherans baptize infants because: 1) It is biblical. While it is true that there is no command to baptize infants (babies) in the bible, it is also true that there is no command to baptize adults. The biblical command is to baptize people (all nations.) Our Lord Jesus clearly considered infants (babies) and children to be people. One of the few times that our Lord grew angry was when His disciples tried to keep the children away from Him. "When Jesus saw this, he was indignant (angry). He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." Mark 10:14 (NIV) Our Lord tells us to baptize all nations. Matthew 28:19 He never tells us to baptize just reasoning adults. All nations clearly included the children of those nations. "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" Matthew 28:19 (NIV) Those who have a problem with infant baptism usually assume that saving faith must involve reason. The line of thought seems to be that since a very young child cannot reason - a child cannot have such faith. Most who follow this line of reasoning believe that baptism is a work of man which demonstrates, or flows from, faith. This is a sharp contrast with the Biblical position that Baptism is a gracious gift of God that bestows saving faith. What we need to remember here is the fact that the Bible teaches that salvation comes through faith and that faith itself is God's gift. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith, and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast." Ephesians 2:8-9 (NIV) "Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ." Romans 10:17 (NIV) God's Word cannot be bound. A child can be given a gift of a million dollars even though that child cannot appreciate it at the time. So a child can be given the gift of faith through the water and Word of Holy Baptism even if that child cannot appreciate it at the time. A related problem is that by involving man (reason) in the process of salvation one turns God's action into something in which sinful man has a part (making a decision for Christ). In so doing one destroys the heart of the gospel message. (The fact that God saves us by grace, through faith!) Think about it for a moment, if I am involved in my salvation, did I do it right? Was I sincere . . . Faith is turned from a gift of God into a work of man. And since we often make mistakes . . . Thus it is that the assurance of salvation is often lost. (continued on next post) |
||||||