Ten Most Damaging Preachers

Well this thread has certainly got off-topic. Back in it's early stages, though, firedome listed Chuck Swindoll as one of the most damaging preachers. Now I'm not a big Swindoll cheerleader, but the man (so far as I know) is thoroughly orthodox & conservative. Notwithstanding the fact that his sermons get a little too sentimental for my taste, I cannot see any valid reason to denounce him. Firedome can you defend yourself?

Back to the subject, it seems that a dangerous person would have to be one that is listened to, or can be influential, and one that has a serious heresy or harmful practice he/she is introducing into the Body-of-Christ.

In that regard... I would concurr with the listing of most of the neo-pentecostal extremists, but I'd also add...

Dr. Greg Boyd

cordially,

CNM

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

 

Chris,

Are you saying that you have no biased or that Baptist Press and Stinson had no bias when reporting about the CBF. Give me a break...of course I have a bias. My bias can be changed through credible evidence though...not by gossip and speculation.

Joseph

 

firedome
why charles stanley? is he charismatic?

 

corpsenomore & renewedspirit1,

These two men are not charasmatic by any means, but, I feel that too much psychology permeates their teaching. Notice that I did not say preaching. These men state that they are Bible teachers. Before anyone goes haywire about Bible teaching, there is nothing wrong with the feeding of your flock, but when this becomes the only thing you do there is a problem. I have yet to hear these men preach a sermon even remotely close to the one Peter preaches in Acts 3 and 4. I have also put-up with this kind of preaching for over two years and am fed-up with it. I was saved and my commission is to share the gospel with the world, but what about my pastor? Is he to preach the gospel? I believe this is the major problem with the church today. Bible teachers as leaders of the church tend to say bring them under the preaching of how a Christian should live, etc..., Dr, Bob Shuler once said, “We are called to fish in the fish pond, not to clean up the fish pond.” This old world is a place to fish. Jesus said He would make us fishers of men, and the world is the place to fish. We are not called upon to clean up the fish pond. We need to catch the fish and get the fish cleaned up."
This has led the sheep into a box canyon with ravenous wolves in pursuit. As God's Word states rather clearly, "Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein." (Je. 6:16) I have included a link to what should be preached more often than not. Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God

 

I don't have ten, but here goes:
Most of the folks on TBN (sans Kennedy, Stanley, Merritt)
Norman Vincent Peale
Robert Schuller
Most all CBF pastors

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JBotwinick:
Chris,

Are you saying that you have no biased or that Baptist Press and Stinson had no bias when reporting about the CBF. Give me a break...of course I have a bias. My bias can be changed through credible evidence though...not by gossip and speculation.

Joseph<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Joseph:

(This thread probably needs to be moved to denominations).

Of course all people work from biases, but when acusations come from people who are presumable regenerate Christians, we should sit up and take notice. Either they are correct or they are intentionally bearing false witness. Read the links I sent you earlier. One involves a first person account of the goddess worship.

Also check out http://www.baptist2baptist.net/ which contains updated information on the SBC, CBF and BGCT.

 

firedome-say what?!

you say swindoll and stanley are psycology preachers and then you QUOTE schuler! the biggest "feel good preacher today!does he even open the Bible?!

 

Bob Shuler is long dead! Has been for some time so I would say it's safe to say he can't open a Bible. I quoted him from J. Vernon Mcgee's Thru the Bible commentary onn Acts pg. 527. BTW he was nicknamed "Fighting" Bob Shuler. Bob Shuler

[ July 12, 2001: Message edited by: firedome ]

 

Well here are my 9, I know the thread is ten but,number 9 and 4 make up a large number.
1. Benny Hinn
2. Paul and Jan of TBN
3. Duplantis
4. The women of TBN
5. MC Hammer, have you seen him.
6. Copeland
7. Parsley
8. Jakes, Get Ready etc.....
9. Almost the rest of the TBN bunch.

 

In no particular order:

1. Marilyn Hickey
2. Joyce Meyer
3. Benny Hinn
4. Paul Crouch
5. Jack Van Impe
6. Peter Popoff
7. Jesse Duplantis
8. Mark Cironna(sp?)
9. Fred Price
10. John Paul II (He may not fit into this category exactly, but definitely damaging!)

Edited to add whoever that guy is that always preaches during TBN's Praise-a-thons. Can't seem to remember his name right now, but he begs for money more than any other preacher I've ever seen.

Lucy

Lucy

[ July 12, 2001: Message edited by: 4xBlessed ]

 

Ummm whats up with Jim Baker being a "damaging preacher"? He sinned, he paid for his sin in prison and he repented of his sin and is now living his life to honor Jesus. I really respect this man, simply because he turned his life around as hard as it was for him he came thru with flying colors. Just thought I would share this. -dar

 

You go, girl, Joseph Bawanni, about Paige Patterson. He is on my hit list. . . . though I hear he sometimes comes up with a good sermon every now and then.

 

According to the Bible Baker is no longer qualified to preach. In Timothy and Titus the Word is clear. He is not blameless, the husband of one wife, need I go on. I hope the man is right with God, I don't want not to be.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by firedome:
corpsenomore & renewedspirit1,
These two men are not charasmatic by any means, but, I feel that too much psychology permeates their teaching. Notice that I did not say preaching. These men state that they are Bible teachers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Firedome, first of all. Your own accusations against them, and your illustrations of what a good preacher should be and do are riddled with sentimental psychology of your own. This folksy sentimental humanism is pervasive in the many preachers in Independent Fundamental Baptist churches(which I presume you are referring to) particularly those of the Jack Hyles stripe. Whereas somebody like Swindoll at least exposits God's Holy Word.

Secondly, in that regard, I would make a distinction between someone who has a full-time pulpit ministry from one who is an itinerant Evangelist, like George Whitefield for example. The Pastor's duty is to train the flock in our most Holy faith. There are a multitude of persons apostasizing from the faith from churches that promote an easy-believism gospel but fail to catechise their congregants. Yet... these same people who are very nearly utterly ignorant of what Christianity is, are out telling unconverted men about what they think the message of Christ is.

cordially,

CNM

 

I can sorta understand what firestorm is saying. The problem with my church isn't teaching (we actaully need more of it) it more worried about what the church looks like. The bushes, lot, etc.

Are we "Keepers of the Aquarium, or fishers of men?"

 

CNM,
Where is my example of a preacher riddled with sentimental psychology? I don't believe that it is sentimental to believe and adhere to the example set forth in Acts. There are approximately 20 sermons in Acts, give or take one or two, and I believe all but one are aimed at sin condemnation and redemption.

I believe if you research the history on George Whitefield, you will see that he was barred from preaching in London. he then turned to the outdoors. Your distinction of preaching vice evangelizing is like splitting hairs. I seem to think that you distinguish them in an attempt to say that a preacher teaches a congregation, but we must call in a specialist (evangelist) to see people getting saved. This is theology ridden with Finneyism. To say that the preacher is to train the flock..., is errant theology. Take for an example, in wanders a man that has it placed on his heart to attend church and in he comes and hears the teachings tailored for the congregation. What does God's Word say about the word to an un-regenerate man? 1Co. 2:14 "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." Is this man who is teaching his flock going to be held blameless at the judgment of Christ? I think not my friend.

If you would like to try something of a test I suggest one that I myself conducted at my church. Ask several people in your church , from the top down, the definition of sin, I believe you might be surprised by the answer you receive.

In Christ,
Rodney Myers (Lk. 14:10-11)

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MyhelpisfromAbove:
[QB]The Pope(is number one)QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh Oh! What's wrong with this picture? LoL

JUST KIDDING...This was posted by our dear MyhelpisfromAbove and was listed in the 10 most damaging preachers thread. Hope you don't mind the little jokey-joke! (why isn't there an innocent smilie?)

&lt;&gt;&lt;

 

firedome, here's what I mean...

FROM...

THE REFORMED PASTOR by Richard Baxter
CHAPTER 2 THE OVERSIGHT OF THE FLOCK

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
There are many of our flock that are young and weak, who, though they are of long standing, are yet of small proficiency or strength. This, indeed, is the most common condition of the godly.

Most of them content themselves with low degrees of grace, and it is no easy matter to get them higher. To bring them to higher and stricter opinions is easy, that is, to bring them from the truth into error, on the right hand as well as on’ the left; but to increase their knowledge and gifts is not easy, and to increase their graces is the hardest of all.

It is a very sad thing for Christians to be weak: it exposeth us to dangers; it abateth our consolations and delight in God, and taketh off the sweetness of wisdom’s ways; it maketh us less serviceable to God and man, to bring less honor to our Master, and to do less good to all about us.

We get small benefit in the use of the means of grace. We too easily play with the serpent’s baits, and are ensnared by his wiles. A seducer will easily shake us, and evil may be made to appear to us as good, truth as falsehood, sin as duty; and so on the contrary.

We are less able to resist and stand in an encounter; we sooner fall; we hardlier rise; and are apter to prove a scandal and reproach to our profession. We less know ourselves, and are more apt to be mistaken as to our own estate, not observing corruptions when they have got advantage of us.

We are dishonorable to the gospel by our very weakness, and little useful to any about us. In a word, though we live to less profit to ourselves or others, yet are we unwilling and too unready to die.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

fwb, the question isn't if Jim is qualified biblically speaking or not, the question is if he is a bad preacher or not. In God's eyes his slate is clean and so it should be the same for us as well. Btw...if he's not qualified then what was he even doing on the list? -dar

 

Jim Bakker got to where he was morally and spiritually because of his theology that allowed him to live that way. That theology was what he was preaching to others and you cannot be a good preacher with bad theology. You might be a good communicator, a showman, a fund raiser (or a crook), all kinds of things with bad theology but you will not be a good preacher.

Not to pile on Magicdar here, but you really should consider the people you listed and the warnings given in the other thread. You say that you won't read Hanegraff's book because his theology disagrees with you. Perhaps you should consider changing your theology. I don't support everything he says but he is absolutely right on this one. The TBN crowd, Joyce Meyers, Benny Hinn, Rod Parsely, these guys are full of bad theology ... stuff that has no biblical basis whatever. That is what makes them bad preachers and they are dangerous to all who give attention to their speaking.