Misconceptions

[Laura798]

You know, as superficial as it is, I really don't get the worst spirit from Furtick. I think as far as megachurch entertainers go, he does it better than about anyone, and seems... well, sincere about it in a way. It's just so superficial that I don't know exactly what he is accomplishing, even in reaching that many people.

It's just sad that this is the extent many have to go to now to get a crowd. If he started actually teaching the word verse by verse he'd immediately start having his numbers drop, because they just want spiritual cookies and candy. So who's more to blame: The preacher or his audience who demands to be entertained, with a few scriptures thrown in to gloss it over?

It's not about the gospel. It's about the money. Satan has a front seat row at these churches--scratch that -- he is driving the bus.
I find Furtick repulsive--for me it is like the story of Dorian Gray--he looks at the pic painted of himself as a young man, but when he looks at the picture, it reflects the wickedness inside of him and it makes the image hideous. I do believe Furtick is a false teacher controlled by Satan as many of these televangelists are-- Kenneth Copeland, Joel Osteen, Benny Hinn, Tod White, etc.

 

[Vindicator]

I seriously doubt anyone would be titillated by that pic.

I dunno. If I were still single... I think I'd steal that suit from him. Makes me a little jealous. I still like to entertain the wife, you know (with humor I mean) so you gotta keep things fresh. And at this age you gotta get creative.

 

[CS1]

I wonder where you buy a bow and arrow like that... maybe one of those romance shops where they sell lots of candles and stuff?

The wings don't seem like they'd really do the job, but then all things are possible with God.

no clue

 

[Vindicator]

for me it is like the story of Dorian Gray--he looks at the pic painted of himself as a young man, but when he looks at the picture, it reflects the wickedness inside of him and it makes the image hideous

Wow. That's a creepy allusion. Hadn't thought of that movie in years.

Well, I haven't watched him a ton. I just know that it smacks of superficiality. Maybe the reason I feel the way I do is because I've seen preachers - local ones here on TV who are pastoring congregations of 300-400 people - who are even worse at teaching the word, and don't even entertain as well as he does, so I guess for me at least he provides something.

So what have you seen from him that you found repulsive? (not arguing, just curious since I don't watch him much).

 

[Laura798]

You know, as superficial as it is, I really don't get the worst spirit from Furtick. I think as far as megachurch entertainers go, he does it better than about anyone, and seems... well, sincere about it in a way. It's just so superficial that I don't know exactly what he is accomplishing, even in reaching that many people.

It's just sad that this is the extent many have to go to now to get a crowd. If he started actually teaching the word verse by verse he'd immediately start having his numbers drop, because they just want spiritual cookies and candy. So who's more to blame: The preacher or his audience who demands to be entertained, with a few scriptures thrown in to gloss it over?

Spontaneous Baptism
In 2014, Steven Furtick was exposed for emotionally manipulative tactics documented in a spontaneous baptism manual. The manual describes plants in the audience responding to the call to be baptized to encourage members in the audience to do so. The guide then describes a NASCAR pitstop style changing room. All of this is to take advantage of the emotions of people in the audience and to baptize them while their rationality may be impaired. The systemic encouragement of fake conversions is conduct unbecoming of a true pastor thereby rendering Furtick unqualified to lead a real church.

Association With False Teachers
There is no shortage of false teachers Steven Furtick associates with. A few of the most profound relationships of Steven Furtick are TD Jakes and Craig Groeschel. Though it has been said that TD Jakes is no longer a modalist, Pentecostal Theology (2019) and ChurchWatch (2017) both report that despite these claims, TD Jakes still teaches.[4] Steven Furtick has had several documented interactions with Jakes including his speaking at Elevation. Craig Groeschel on the other hand was an inspiration for Elevation Church.

https://evangelicaldarkweb.org/2020/04/29/is-steve-furtick-a-false-teacher/

Someone recommended Craig Groeschel--pastor mentioned at the end of the article--she seemed educated, smart-- however, in ONE minute of seeing him in the link she sent --I was thinking what a FAKE. I can't understand how anyone who calls themselves a believer can be hood winked by these guys--where is there spiritual discernment--it is one of the reasons I believe we are in the falling away.

 

[Vindicator]

Association With False Teachers
There is no shortage of false teachers Steven Furtick associates with. A few of the most profound relationships of Steven Furtick are TD Jakes and Craig Groeschel. Though it has been said that TD Jakes is no longer a modalist, Pentecostal Theology (2019) and ChurchWatch (2017) both report that despite these claims, TD Jakes still teaches.[4] Steven Furtick has had several documented interactions with Jakes including his speaking at Elevation. Craig Groeschel on the other hand was an inspiration for Elevation Church.

I think this one is sort of to be expected. All the big money makers tend to run in the same circles.

Spontaneous Baptism
In 2014, Steven Furtick was exposed for emotionally manipulative tactics documented in a spontaneous baptism manual. The manual describes plants in the audience responding to the call to be baptized to encourage members in the audience to do so. The guide then describes a NASCAR pitstop style changing room. All of this is to take advantage of the emotions of people in the audience and to baptize them while their rationality may be impaired. The systemic encouragement of fake conversions is conduct unbecoming of a true pastor thereby rendering Furtick unqualified to lead a real church.

Haven't read the article yet, but this wouldn't surprise me. I do think it's unethical. I read that Billy Graham used to do a similar thing at stadium events. When the altar calls came, they would have a number of people start walking to the front from all over the stadium to give the allusion that several were coming to repentance, and create a sort of domino effect. I don't think that was too ethical either, but I suppose God will judge the motives of us all when all is said and done; whether such tricks were for the sake of drawing men to God, or aggrandizing oneself and the "effectiveness" of one's ministry.

 

[Laura798]

Wow. That's a creepy allusion. Hadn't thought of that movie in years.

Well, I haven't watched him a ton. I just know that it smacks of superficiality. Maybe the reason I feel the way I do is because I've seen preachers - local ones here on TV who are pastoring congregations of 300-400 people - who are even worse at teaching the word, and don't even entertain as well as he does, so I guess for me at least he provides something.

So what have you seen from him that you found repulsive? (not arguing, just curious since I don't watch him much).

It was a book written by Oscar Wilde, made into a move a few times. I've looked him up--I find him so FAKE. I spot this kind of thing a mile away--it is strange for me as it is so very obvious to me--he is a charlatan like all the rest making money off the gospel--and he looks evil--just like the others--they look like they are possessed. I feel like I need to scrub my eyes and my mind out with soap and water.

 

[Laura798]

I think this one is sort of to be expected. All the big money makers tend to run in the same circles.


Haven't read the article yet, but this wouldn't surprise me. I do think it's unethical. I read that Billy Graham used to do a similar thing at stadium events. When the altar calls came, they would have a number of people start walking to the front from all over the stadium to give the allusion that several were coming to repentance, and create a sort of domino effect. I don't think that was too ethical either, but I suppose God will judge the motives of us all when all is said and done; whether such tricks were for the sake of drawing men to God, or aggrandizing oneself and the "effectiveness" of one's ministry.

Well those 'tricks' have been revealed and they are NEVER of God--it's not something secreted away in their hearts--it was done in the open and there were witnesses. We are warned in scripture repeatedly about false teachers for a reason and we too are responsible to warn others. "you will know them by their fruit."

 

[Vindicator]

It was a book written by Oscar Wilde, made into a move a few times. I've looked him up--I find him so FAKE. I spot this kind of thing a mile away--it is strange for me as it is so very obvious to me--he is a charlatan like all the rest making money off the gospel--and he looks evil--just like the others--they look like they are possessed. I feel like I need to scrub my eyes and my mind out with soap and water.

Ok. I suppose if thoughts of Dorian Grey came to my mind, I'd be pretty concerned too, LoL. I always have a problem with leaders living in multi-million dollar mansions. How that demonstrates all things equal is beyond me. I mean, owning one's own house is one thing, but living in a metropolis is another. That's the part I can't support from any of them, regardless of what they teach. It's bad representation. It night be justified if they made all their money in real estate or banking or some other profession, but that's the churches money they are living lavishly off of, and it never sits well with me. I don't care how many books they've sold off their popularity while reportedly refusing receive a salary.

 

[Laura798]

Ok. I suppose if thoughts of Dorian Grey came to my mind, I'd be pretty concerned too, LoL. I always have a problem with leaders living in multi-million dollar mansions. How that demonstrates all things equal is beyond me. I mean, owning one's own house is one thing, but living in a metropolis is another. That's the part I can't support from any of them, regardless of what they teach. It's bad representation. It night be justified if they made all their money in real estate or banking or some other profession, but that's the churches money they are living lavishly off of, and it never sits well with me. I don't care how many books they've sold off their popularity while reportedly refusing receive a salary.

Agreed. When we look at Paul--he continued to make tents so "he wouldn't be a burden"--of course he had every right to be supported and he was at times, but he also went without. And Christ himself said he had no where to lay His head.

"I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again. 24 Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. 25 Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was pelted with stones, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, 26 I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my fellow Jews, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false believers. 27 I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked. 28 Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. 29 Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn?--2 Corinthians 11

 

[Vindicator]

Well those 'tricks' have been revealed and they are NEVER of God--it's not something secreted away in their hearts--it was done in the open and there were witnesses. We are warned in scripture repeatedly about false teachers for a reason and we too are responsible to warn others. "you will know them by their fruit."

Maybe the worst part is that so many are led to think such "ministry" suffices as actually "receiving from God" in some way.

Again, for me it's mostly about misrepresentation. The messages present Christianity as a social religion that further engrains people to this world and its culture, rather than a spiritual one that seeks to draw them into the godly life and genuine fellowship with God.

 

[Vindicator]

Agreed. When we look at Paul--he continued to make tents so "he wouldn't be a burden"--of course he had every right to be supported and he was at times, but he also went without. And Christ himself said he had no where to lay His head.

And how few people teach this, even in more conservative circles now.

Gotta check out for the night. Been fun! Talk to you tomorrow maybe.
- V

 

[Laura798]

Maybe the worst part is that so many are led to think such "ministry" suffices as actually "receiving from God" in some way.

Again, for me it's mostly about misrepresentation. The messages present Christianity as a social religion that further engrains people to this world and its culture, rather than a spiritual one that seeks to draw them into the godly life and genuine fellowship with God.

Yes. It is why I have given up on the Institutional Church. Even if the church leaders are living simply--so much money goes to run the machine--and never mind the sitting passively for one hour every Sunday to hear a 'movie trailer' sermon--taking months or even a year to get thru ONE book of the bible--'tune in next week'--it's like a Netflix Series(as Jack Hibbs of Calvary Chapel, Chino Hills took a year to go thru Romans) and to think the letter to the Romans was read in ONE sitting and then passed on. Okay I'm off for the evening--good to chat--and whatever you do--do not buy those red boxers...or skinny jeans!

 

[wattie]

What source do you have for this?


The question isn't about their veracity being known, however. The question is when was the canon officially closed. Source documentation is therefore needed on this.


In bringing up "the more excellent way," however, he again returns to discussing operating in the gifts, so if you mean by this that the "more excellent way" was to not operate in the gifts any longer, why does he begin Chapter 14 with:

14 Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy.

Seems out of context if he is trying to argue that the gifts will be set aside to then return to discussing them again.

Regarding the canon being recognised, the point im trying to make is --it was the process of the bible being completed -- not the recognition by officialdom that is what counts. The recognition by the council is well after AD 96.. but the process of God moving in holy men of God to pen scripture completes around that point.

But anyway-- some of the evidence I found not in the Case for Christ, because I have given the book away-- but in Evidence that Demands a Verdict 2017 by Josh McDowell & Sean McDowell.

Page 30- Speaking of Irenaeus (AD 180)--

Irenaeus as a bishop of Lyons in Gaul...

'His writings attest the canonical recognition of the fourfold gospel and Acts of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Phillipians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, of 1 Peter and 1 John and of the Revelation.
In his treatise , Against Heresies, III, ii, 8, it is evident that by AD 180 the idea of the fourfold Gospel had become so axiomatic throughout christendom that it could be referred to as an established fact as obvious and inevitable and natural as the four cardinal points of the compass (as we call them) or the four winds.' (Bruce, BP, 100).

This is not showing the AD 96 point of completion..there may be other evidence for this..but it is showing the acceptance of the canon before the council saw it as so.

 

[ResidentAlien]

You said George Fox taught false doctrine.

George Fox started the Quakers and the inner light doctrine started with him. Fox said it was the Holy Spirit but the Holy Spirit didn't tell him or anyone else the things they think He did. For example, the Quaker inner "light" forbids baptism and the Lord's supper.

 

[Vindicator]

and never mind the sitting passively for one hour every Sunday to hear a 'movie trailer' sermon

We seem to have quite a bit in common... have you been lurking on me someplace else maybe? Just kidding, LoL.

Regarding the canon being recognised, the point im trying to make is --it was the process of the bible being completed -- not the recognition by officialdom that is what counts. The recognition by the council is well after AD 96.. but the process of God moving in holy men of God to pen scripture completes around that point.

I understand. But for a question as important as this, it still kinda necessitates proof.

the fourfold gospel and Acts of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Phillipians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, of 1 Peter and 1 John and of the Revelation... This is not showing the AD 96 point of completion..there may be other evidence for this..but it is showing the acceptance of the canon before the council saw it as so.

I appreciate the digging, but now he left out James, Jude, 2 Peter, Hebrews, 2 John, 3 John and Philemon.

And that's kinda my point. What source would show they recognized ALL the New Testament books and ONLY the New Testament books and nothing else, prior to 393 A.D? I don't think such a source exists. The Muratorian Fragment is the earliest attempt at an actual canon (it dated to 170 A.D., which is contemporary with Irenaeus), and it doesn't include Hebrews, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, James and one of the epistles of John either. And it includes the Apocalypse of Peter, which is regarded today as non-canonical.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muratorian_fragment

 

[wattie]

We seem to have quite a bit in common... have you been lurking on me someplace else maybe? Just kidding, LoL.


I understand. But for a question as important as this, it still kinda necessitates proof.


I appreciate the digging, but now he left out James, Jude, 2 Peter, Hebrews, 2 John, 3 John and Philemon.

And that's kinda my point. What source would show they recognized ALL the New Testament books and ONLY the New Testament books and nothing else, prior to 393 A.D? I don't think such a source exists. The Muratorian Fragment is the earliest attempt at an actual canon (it dated to 170 A.D., which is contemporary with Irenaeus), and it doesn't include Hebrews, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, James and one of the epistles of John either. And it includes the Apocalypse of Peter, which is regarded today as non-canonical.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muratorian_fragment

Well.... it's still the point at which God's finishes moving in holy men of God to finish the scripture that would be the closing of the canon. Officialdom recognising that happening isn't the point of the supernatural power of God finishing in that process.

But this is good information you also have and I may be able to find more.. there are more refs in Evidence that Demands a Verdict.. and if I can get back my copy of the Case for Christ.. which I think is the interview with F.F.Bruce.. or get Bruce's book.. then I can pass on more info

Blessings

 

[CS1]

Well.... it's still the point at which God's finishes moving in holy men of God to finish the scripture that would be the closing of the canon. Officialdom recognising that happening isn't the point of the supernatural power of God finishing in that process.

But this is good information you also have and I may be able to find more.. there are more refs in Evidence that Demands a Verdict.. and if I can get back my copy of the Case for Christ.. which I think is the interview with F.F.Bruce.. or get Bruce's book.. then I can pass on more info

Blessings

God has never stopped moving in holy men. it was holy men who sought the Lord and the leading of the Holy Spirit to have an understanding of what scriptures are authoritative and absolutely the word of God.

What makes the scriptures inspired? Very simple, the thin thread that run's through Genesis to Revelation. The Person Jesus Christ.

His words are the foundation on which ALL scripture rest, both Old and New Testament The Eye Witnesses of the Resurrected Lord. and the Comfriming of the Resrurrrected Lord by Signs & wonders through the people of God as it was then and today. We are not to worship the bible, we are supposed to live the word of God by Faith.

The canonization of the Bible is done by God through man but it was God who guided this. The same Holy Spirit in the world today is still working as HE did before. Yet, we apply in our lives the word of God written thousands of years ago and see the same results; if you are not, that is in no way meaning it is not so. Because the word of God still does what it did then. The false narrative that God doesn't heal or empower with the Holy Spirit because one has not experienced or witnessed it, is like saying Jesus was not raised from the dead because I did not see it.

 

[CS1]

God has never stopped moving in holy men. it was holy men who sought the Lord and the leading of the Holy Spirit to have an understanding of what scriptures are authoritative and absolutely the word of God.

What makes the scriptures inspired? Very simple, the thin thread that run's through Genesis to Revelation. The Person Jesus Christ.

His words are the foundation on which ALL scripture rest, both Old and New Testament The Eye Witnesses of the Resurrected Lord. and the Comfriming of the Resrurrrected Lord by Signs & wonders through the people of God as it was then and today. We are not to worship the bible, we are supposed to live the word of God by Faith.

The canonization of the Bible is done by God through man but it was God who guided this. The same Holy Spirit in the world today is still working as HE did before. Yet, we apply in our lives the word of God written thousands of years ago and see the same results; if you are not, that is in no way meaning it is not so. Because the word of God still does what it did then. The false narrative that God doesn't heal or empower with the Holy Spirit because one has not experienced or witnessed it, is like saying Jesus was not raised from the dead because I did not see it.

Moreover, the Canonization of scripture is not the END of a move of God or God moving today it is the establishment as a legal Document FROM GOD TO man in HIs word as to what HE will continue to do Because HE said so.

HIS law is eternal, His word is eternal, His Spirit is Eternal, and He is doing all that HE said HE would do in HIS word today. And nothing has stopped. WHY?

Because Jesus has not returned and Jesus is still calling and saving and healing today as the Power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is preached. Those in many seminaries embrace knowledge yet display no action of the faith they profess, only what they know not what they do. PUffed up with pride of what they know about God yet no one is saved in those places, just fans of the teaching with no application or evidence of a changed life. But they attack others out of the empty life they lead and if it were not for that those they degree with, their life would be meaningless. Sad, so sad.

 

[Nehemiah6]

and if I can get back my copy of the Case for Christ.. which I think is the interview with F.F.Bruce.. or get Bruce's book.. then I can pass on more info

Beware of F.F. Bruce. He sided with Westcott and Hort and wrote a commentary based upon the NIV.