What do you think of Dr. Curtis Hutson?

The God in which they serve/served is the same one I do as well. I will say this, I would rather have these men praying for me than 99.9% of the "christians" I've met in my life time.

These men are and were considered the extreme right within christianity and the baptist faith. And, I do not mean that as a political statement. They were extremely right in what they did. For that reason, they have battled many foes within the church, but I firmly believe their service to be God centered.

Before Dr. Rice went home, I was honored to hear him speak on more than one occassion; was blessed each and every time. These men you mention are as solid within the faith of christianity you will ever know in your life time in my opinion.

Curtis Hutson, I've heard on tape and Shelton Smith, the Sword editor came to Baytown, Texas a few years back and I had the honor of meeting him at the conference. Was encouraged by his willingness to speak to me on a private matter. At the time we had never met, but he took the time to give me some sound biblical advice; by the way, which proved to be correct.

When I hear people like this being mentioned, it assures me their works will never die. The God they serve/d promises that the planted Word will not return void; they've done an awful lot of planting.

I endorse them without reservation and I pray you will learn from their years of wisdom as many thousands have also.

Godspeed,
Paul {Spam}

 

I think Curtis Hutson is dead. His understanding of "soul-winning" runs counter to what I believe true gospel preaching to be.

I think John R. Rice is also dead. And his understanding of gospel preaching also runs counter to what I believe true gospel preaching to be.

I think David Jeremiah is still alive and pastoring a church about 10 miles from me. His church is ecumenical and so worldly it makes me wonder what could he possibly be thinking.

 

Well, what do y'all think of Adrian Rogers? I enjoy his messages, and I don't think I've heard him preach anything I would object to. However, I've been hood-winked before. I would appreciate any warnings if there is anything especially unscriptural in his preaching.

 

I have heard these things [by what was considered a "reasonable source] about Dr. David Jeremiah:
1.That he is a "conservative" Charismatic now, in league with Chuck Smith ("pope" of the Calvary Chapel churches).
2.D.Jeremiah had an affair within the last few years, which was quickly hushed up & swept under the carpet by Pope Smith.
Anyone else be able to confirm these things?

 

John R. Rice was editor of The Sword of the Lord, a prominent independent fundamental Baptist newspaper. After his death, Curtis Hutson became editor. Hutson is also dead, succumbing to cancer a few years ago. Though these men held many positions with which I would agree, they held a form of the gospel that I consider "easy-believism", which is very light on the convicting work of the Holy Spirit, but very heavy on leading a "convert" down the Roman Road to salvation; which, in addition to using scriptures, uses many leading questions; and when they are responded to "correctly" the "soul-winner" usually pronounces them to be saved. Several of my family have been long-time subscribers to The Sword of the Lord; so when Curtis Hutson preached at a Conference in Tyler, TX (not too far from me), I went to hear him (out of curiousity). He had many true things to say, although he was not what one might call an exceptional speaker. He also had a few habits that I found annoying, such as putting his hand to his ear and asking for amens. This conference, I suppose, was preacher-oriented. At the end of his sermon, he used several psychological tactics designed to get all the preachers to the front of the church. Stuff like - if you don't come down here you don't really love the Lord or your mother. As far as I am concerned that is totally arminian, the work of man rather than of God. This is my only experience with him other than his paper, and ordering his sermon on "footwashing". From some things that I heard on the tape, I initiated a correspondence with him, and found he originally was part of a group of Baptists in Georgia (which I was trying to locate) that were somewhat primitivistic and practiced feetwashing. He was kind in his correspondence, although a little condescending (not so much toward me as toward the people with whom he had formerly associated). I'm sure he was a good person, but I think the easy-believism promoted by him and the Sword Conferences is a dangerous heresy. Perhaps one of the most dangerous because it strikes right at the heart of the gospel.

David Jeremiah - don't really know much about him at all; just that he a fairly widely heard radio speaker; a Baptist, I think, though, if so, an ecumenical one.

[ November 07, 2001: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

I wasn't big on Curtis Hudson for many reasons, one of the biggest was how he went after Tim Lee, also the numbers game, but he did do some good things, I just wasn't a fan.
I did like John R. Rice for the most part.
KeeperofMyHouse, I for one like Adrian Rogers and R.G.Lee who was pastor of Bell View before Adrian.
Side bar, went on a cruse with Adrian one time and just watching him being a christian husband on how he was with his wife was great. My wife still won't get out of the car untill I open the door, she has helped me learn alot of what he was doing right. Also he talked to you untill you ended it, he was(is) down to earth, as well as a great preacher.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thomas Cassidy:
I think David Jeremiah is still alive and pastoring a church about 10 miles from me. His church is ecumenical and so worldly it makes me wonder what could he possibly be thinking. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

David Jeremiah is a Dallas Seminary Grad and former Cedarville College President.

Do you have any evidence that his church is worldly and ecumencial?

[ November 08, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]

 

Dios, they come out of the woodwork with opinions, don't they? I did give mine also, but know, I am basing my opinion on first hand knowledge and that I've experinced.

I've heard many oppose these men; and many others not mentioned, I might add. The reasonings differ, of course, depending on the person. Some may have a legitimate gripe, but some oppose them out of vengeance for having exposed their sins, some out of jealousy because their success pales in comparison which has left them feeling insecure or inadequate, and yet some are against them because they are following the opinion of a crowd. Our job is to pray for discernment whatever the situation.

But, with all men being guilty of sin, I am positive these men have offended some at one time or another; I sure hope they have, because any faithful christian's stance should do the same. A true man/woman of God that is standing firm in his/her faith, will have opposition. True, too, if these ones have offended by sin, they will stand in judgement as will we all.

Be encouraged to rightfully discern by the boundaries established by the Holy Spirit and He will direct you to know whom is correct in their stance. Don't look to man, but to God, because some, unfortunately will follow a man of God, more so, than God. Even in these mens camps, I am sure some are not strong enough in the Word to know the difference. But, I am pretty certain these men do their best to teach God and not themselves; but one day we'll all know the truth.

Till then, glean from these and many many more that have stood the test and been found faithful.

Godspeed,
Paul {Spam}

 

Curtis Hudson, had some strange views regarding the Gospel that I would call extreme easy believism. His pamplet against LORDSHIP SALVATION practically taught a another Gospel that I found chilling to read.

He also became infamous for slandering John MacArthur and also nitpicked Jerry Falwell and Liberty University through one attack after the other in the Sword of the Lord.

 

Dr. David Jeremiah - Turning Point

David Jeremiah is the senior pastor of Shadow Mountain Community Church in San Diego, California, where he also serves as chancellor of Christian Heritage College. He and his wife, Donna, have four children and four grandchildren.

He is the founder of Turning Point, a ministry committed to providing sound Bible teaching through national radio and television broadcasting. Dr. Jeremiah's practical teaching on topics such as family, stress, the New Age, biblical prophecy, and overcoming adversity, forms the foundation of Turning Point. The inspiring messages of Turning Point are currently broadcast weekly from more than 1,100 national and international radio outlets and televised in all 50 states.

Dr. Jeremiah has also authored numerous books, including Escape the Coming Night, Prayer-The Great Adventure, God in You, Gifts from God, Jesus' Final Warning, A Bend in the Road, and Slaying the Giants in Your Life.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bendecido por Dios:


I don't know about the strange views? Please explain.

As for John McArthur, he denys the atonement of the Blood of Jesus. A friend of mine has tapes of J.McArthur about 10 years ago where he believed in the Blood as atonement. Now, he has changed his views. My friend has both tapes that show him changing his views.
Jerry Falwell, just look what he did recently. Gives a great speach and then recants because of pressure from the world.
I would say Dr. Hudson knew what he was talking about.

[ November 09, 2001: Message edited by: Bendecido por Dios ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't believe John MacArthur ever denied the blood atonement of Christ. What he did deny was the eternality of the Son, of which he readily and publicly corrected his belief a couple of years ago.

 

Hudson, slandered MacArthur. MacArthur does not deny the Blood of Christ and was silly nitpicking on Hudson's part. Hudson fostered a lie.

Hudson believed one could be a Christian and stop believing or see no change in one's life after conversion. He borderline taught a Gospel without repentance and it seems his view of faith was at times simply a mental assent. His view seem to be that repentance was simply repenting of one's refusal to receive Jesus Christ but that a "Believer" could continue in their sinful life after conversion and never leave that lifestyle they had before conversion yet would still be considered a Christian despite no changed lifestyle.

 

From an issue of Grace To You -- an article entitled "I believe in the Precious Blood" by John MacArthur:

"The Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ is holy and precious The shedding of His blood in death was the price of atonement for our sins. As He literally poured our His blood in a sacrificial act, He sealed forever the New Covenant and purchased our redemption."

This three page article contains three main points:

1. Jesus' blood is the basis of redemption.
2. Jesus shed his literal blood when he died.
3. Not every reference Jesus' blood is literal.

ON this third point he says, "Clearly the word blood is often used to mean more than the literal red fluid. Thus it is that when when Scripture speaks of the blood of Christ, it usually means much more than just the red and white corpuscles -- it encompasses His death, the sacrifice for our sins, and all that is involved in the atonement. ... Just as the cross is an expression that includes all of Christ's atoning work, so is the blood. It is not the actual liquid that cleanses us from sin, but the work of redemption in Christ in pouring it out."

He is absolutely right on this issue. Think of it this way: THe wages of sin is death. The blood is important because the life of the flesh is in the blood. When the blood was shed, it was a sacrifical, violent death that paid the price for sin.

MacArthur never denied the blood of Christ. If you write to them, they will probably still send you a tape and some printed information about what he has said about it throughout his ministry.

 

Bendecido,

The Sword I believe still sells Hudson's pamplet on LORDSHIP SALVATION. I do not believe it is online. He goes into great amount of detail of his views in that pamplet.