Ten Most Damaging Preachers

I totally agree with Pastor Larry's theology (as far as it is concerned with Charasmatics) but I can understand MagicDar concern about reading the book. Everytime we disagree with something we tell the other person it will be clear as day as soon as the read the book on the issue WRITTEN FROM OUR SIDE. We have all heard of Bias, haven't we? You can find a persuasive book to support any view. Take the KJV debate, depending on who you are talking to, they either tell you to just
Read Riplinger's book, it will all be clear
or read White's book, it will all be clear.

Now I'm not agnostic, I believe in Truth will a capital T. But to be fair to the I think MargicDar should read both sides. Its easy for someone to read their own book when it is preaching to the choir, its another thing all together to give both sides equal weight. Then if one side really is CLEAR and TRUE, the person should find it.

 

CNM,
I agree with this stance as you will see in my original post, but, this is not the greatest need in a church. Referencing your book of preference, The Reformed Pastor, notice that in point one of chapter two he states, "the work of conversion is the first and great thing we must drive at", he then adds to his case point two, which states that we must be ready to give advice to people who have cases such as the jailer to Paul and Silas, "what must we do to be saved?" To bypass these two steps seem to me as one who puts the cart before the horse. BTW, when a pastor spends three days a week feeding his flock, when are the unsaved people who hopefully venture into his church going to be preached to about their sin? I say this because this is the rule rather than the exception.

 

Firedome,

From reading all of your posts on this subject, I get the impression you think that the only thing that should come from the pulpit is good ol' fashion "fire and brimstone," "turn or burn" sermons! I happen to think Charles Stanley is an excellent preacher . . . one of the best alive today.

 

I am in no way unclear in what I believe. I won't go into detail seeing this is a baptist thread and don't wish to offend. The reason I won't be reading this book suggested is because I do agree with the theology that these preachers preach. I'm sorry that you don't and you don't feel its biblical but I do.

As for Jim Baker, sin is sin and his theology did not cause his sin, it was simply the temptations of the flesh that caused him to sin, any baptist can and has sinned the exact same way he has so lets not go there. The point I was trying to make was this....Jim sinned, he repented of his sin as well as went to prison and served a term for his sin and now God considers his slate of this clean since he has turned from his sin. All his past sin is just that...PAST, its history so no matter if he preaches or not the fact is, he should not be branded by other christians as a "bad seed" or "bad preacher". Personally I feel he has a very effective testimony and is moving on for God.

-dar

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by firedome:
CNM, I agree with this stance as you will see in my original post, but, this is not the greatest need in a church. Referencing your book of preference, The Reformed Pastor, notice that in point one of chapter two he states, "the work of conversion is the first and great thing we must drive at", he then adds to his case point two, which states that we must be ready to give advice to people who have cases such as the jailer to Paul and Silas, "what must we do to be saved?" To bypass these two steps seem to me as one who puts the cart before the horse. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In my view the reason that Baxter's point about conversion is necessary is because there are so many goats hanging around the sheep-pen pretending they are sheep. Thus your point from Baxter and mine are part of a whole which seeks to make true converts out of the pretenders by catechizing them in our most Holy Faith. It is members who are the target of this evangelism.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by firedome:
BTW, when a pastor spends three days a week feeding his flock, when are the unsaved people who hopefully venture into his church going to be preached to about their sin? I say this because this is the rule rather than the exception.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unsaved people shouldn't be routinely venturing into the church as a rule. It may be that God in His sovereign workings, leads an unconverted person to a church from time to time, and praise His name for it, for His ways are perfect. But as far as efforts to bring unbelievers into the assembly of the saints, it is a missplaced effort and one remiscient of the Finneyism you have previously objected to.

cordially,

CNM

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kathy:


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;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>




LOL! Kenneth &lt;&gt;&lt; (I still like d fish)

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Unsaved people shouldn't be routinely venturing into the church as a rule. It may be that God in His sovereign workings, leads an unconverted person to a church from time to time, and praise His name for it, for His ways are perfect. But as far as efforts to bring unbelievers into the assembly of the saints, it is a missplaced effort and one remiscient of the Finneyism you have previously objected to.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would like to know what the following verse of scripture refers to? Lk. 14:23 "And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. 24 For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper."

 

CNM,

You said, "But as far as efforts to bring unbelievers into the assembly of the saints, it is a missplaced effort and one remiscient of the Finneyism you have previously objected to."

If we model our churches after the NT churches, what is our mission? I see them as:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI>Gathering together on the first day of the week to worship God<LI>To edify and teach one another<LI>To pray for one another<LI>To pray for the unsaved<LI>And "go and make disciples of all nations"<LI>"Teach these new disciples"[/list]

Kind of hard to sit in our cozy little churches and "play church" and put a dent in the latter part of that list!

[ July 14, 2001: Message edited by: wellsjs ]

 

firedome and wellsjs...

I would appreciate it if you both would click your EDIT buttons and COPY your posts, then go to the new thread I've started at this LINK and paste them there as a reply for that thread.

Unbelievers have no place in the Church!

thanks for your patience,

CNM

 

Dar,

The reason Baker is on this list is because he is just that, damaging. He preached health and wealth if you give me your money. Many a person did just that and he stole it. He lost his creditabilty with people. The same thing that is going on now with others on this list. They preach give me your money so I can do this for God. Who cares that they make millions from their ministry. They preach to the emotions of people who have not a clue what the Word of God says, or understands the context of what is being said. Maybe they could not take so much from their ministry and spend it for God, instead of being greedy of filthy lucre. Baker very well may be forgiven for his sin. His going to prision has nothing to do with God forgiveness, only man. I pary he is right with God. Still there is consiquences for the sin that we do. His is he can no longer preach.

 

I'd like to add Harold Camping of Family Radio. I've heard him say on the radio that a two month old baby can be saved, if elected, and on the other hand, some babies die and go to Hell because they're not elected. Thankfully, he's not a mainstream Calvinist, but on the fringe.

 

Preach whats in the BOOK.
If not GOD will deal with you harshly.

But for ALL OF US to sit back and say which ones are 'damaging' is INSANE and LAUGHABLE.

I think MOST people are so full of themselves I'm trying to figure out how God has any space to get in. This message thread proves it.

Dudes like Jimmy Swaggart have helped save millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of people and if there are issues about how he does things I think the BOSS should deal with it... and most of the time He does and in this life too!

Get real people, read/listen/preach the Word and get on with your life.
--Danny

 

Oly, you are missing the point, we are to give warning of false prophets, as did Jeremiah and Jesus Himself did. He listed "damaging preachers" many times in the Gospels, they were called, "Pharisees", etc.

 

Danny,

Should we listen to God's Word which says:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. (Mat 7:15 NIV)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OR

Should we take your advise and ignore them?

By the way: "They come to you in sheep's clothing" means they come appearing to be a believer or a pastor/preacher.

 

Just to say that I am a Pentecostal - and agree with the consensus here on "damaging preachers"... any tips on how I can warn my brethren about them? I have bought and read "Counterfeit Revival" and I want to communicate that many popular TV preachers preach heresy.

Thanks!

 

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


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.

[ July 11, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Chris,

While I certainly disagree with your unbiblical stances against women, and you pseudo-biblical reference in Ephesians, and your heretical views about hermanuetics, this is not why I am writing.

You just got your facts wrong. There were two professors at SWBTS who refused to sign the BFM2K, and were relieved of their duties.

just thoughts,
Scott

 

Scott,

Wasn't one of those professors Dr. Calvin Miller (or did he just chose to leave because he didn't want to sign it?

Joseph

 

Here is my list, keeping the names within the realm of Fundamentalism:

1. Jack Hyles
2. Happy Jack (my nickname for Jack Hyles)
3. Preacher (title by Jack Hyles followers)
4. Dave Hyles (Jack's son)
5. Pastor D. Zaster (my nickname for Dave)
6-10. Re-read 1-5.

 

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000078