ON
DOCTRINE INFORMATION
The BAD NEWS
Messages Sent To On Doctrine
2006
All Messages Reproduced As Received Without Correction Or Alteration
Names and e-mail addresses removed in accord with the On Doctrine Privacy Policy
Messages are unverified as to content or accuracy
All responses labeled ON DOCTRINE NOTE are by Gary A. Hand unless stated differently
#1
Who the heck are you? I'm trying to get programming of TBN's tv shows, namely Against All Odds
and I get this garbage.
I'd try watching the above documentary if I were you - it might just help your faith if you have any at all
to start with.
Because of Paul Crouch, Christianity is being spread around the world.
What are you accomplishing by criticism of his work?
Get real and Get faith, instead of wasting your time!!!
[15]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Welcome to On Doctrine, —.
Thank you for your visit and message on the Contact page.
A brief note regarding who I am can be found on the About page, at:
About
The articles regarding Paul Crouch are self-explanatory and deal with the issues of his beliefs as
opposed to what he claims the Scripture teaches, which it does not.
You can visit the TBN website at:
www.tbn.org
There are many resources on the On Doctrine website, so please come back again for a visit.
#2A
hall of shame
I noticed on your hall of shame that the only people you have on there are the charismatic type people.
I am an ordained baptist Pastor from [name removed] and I am wondering is there a
reason why you only have these peopleon your web site or do you have have a secret agenda because
these are the folks that you dissagree with doctrinally?
I could name you baptist pastors and evangelists from coast to coast who have fallen to the same sins
but for some strange reason you have left all of them off your list, why brother. Are you being
honest?
I have preached and pastored for 30 years and have been involved with
Baptists
Friends
Menonites
Amish
Church of God
Assembly of God
Charismatic's of all types
Non-denominatioal
Luthern
Medthodists
Native American tribes
community churches
bible churches
many others
Let's be honest brother, there are crooks and fallen brothers and sisters in all of them. What good is
your web site doing? It seems like you are fighting someone,some group or somebody out there in
no-where land just to fight. Aren't you too busy winning people to Jesus and teaching the word to
waste your time fighting or pointing out others sins? Jesus is coming soon isn't he????????? Well isn't
he?
Come on man, get in the real fight of faith; satan is trying to take people to hell, let's give the world
God's plan for salvation.
[18]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
There is no secret agenda on the On Doctrine website. The Hall of Shame is only one page out of well
over a thousand that are the content of the website. If you move on into the other sections of the
website, you will find that I am quite up front about my disagreement with Charismatic doctrine as it is
presented and practiced today, because it is built on a false non-biblical foundation.
If the people listed did not do what is claimed on the website, then you would have reason to disagree
with their inclusion, however, since they are guilty, you have no case to present. Herbert and Garner
Ted Armstrong were not Charismatics, as well as the Catholic church, although there are Charismatic
groups within that organization, although its inclusion has nothing to do with Charismatic theology. The
Hall of Shame changes from time-to-time and at one time David Hocking made an appearance, so I
think you are assuming way too much. The fact that I do not have an infinite number of persons listed
from every conceivable group is not a question of honesty.
If the persons listed do not belong on the list because their conduct is or was not as stated, then that is a
question of honesty.
The Hall of Shame is not about whether or not those individuals listed have salvation, or whether they
have been forgiven by God for their conduct or whether they have been forgiven by the church. The
issue is in relation to their qualifications to hold a position of leadership in the church as a result of
specific conduct that disqualifies them from leadership, as specifically stated in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and
Titus 1. The question becomes, Who has the authority? Is it the leader who has violated their trust or is
it the Scripture that presents the standard? The point of the Hall of Shame is that leaders do not have a
self-proclaimed authority that exempts them from liability in relation to the standards applied to their
position as mandated by the Scripture, and Christians should be discerning when leadership presents
an argument to the contrary.
I am not sure what you are attempting to defend, but I would hope it is not that the conduct represented
on the Hall of Shame is acceptable in the church or that it is tolerable because it might be that the gospel
is being preached by the individual. It is infinitely preferable and mandated by the Scripture that
leadership in the church be beyond reproach, rather than those who bring reproach on the name of
Jesus Christ, and those who stand true to the biblical standards should be the ones that the church
demands as leaders. The fact that Jesus Christ may come at any time, is not a justification to reject
proper doctrine or refuse to call leaders to account.
#2B
Well my brother it's like I said, if you were being honest in your criticism your would have us
fundamental baptists, community churches, bible churches and all those non charismatic types on your
lists. But you see you have the typical baptist mind set, "it's not us we are ok and we can explain our
errors, it's those deceived so called charismatics and other wacko's that are the problem" You know,
I spent half of my time at Tennessee Temple (which I really love as a school ) with that mind set and
even forcing the scriptures on situations I didn't understand so I could show others we were right and
they are wrong.
I spent half of my life in the biggest baptist churches in America; in Hammond, Ind., Ohio, Tennessee,
Georgia,Arizona and I love my Baptist brothern. But one day I had to stop and look at my self and
wonder why am I spending so much valuable time in fighting other churches, other preachers and other
denominations? I went to the Lord and the Lord showed me I'm not walking in the right kind of love. I
may be winning the battle but I'm loosing the war.
For Example you may have seen Hal Lindsay was taken off the TBN network for being so hard and
critical on the Islam religion. A neighbor of mine is the local TBN asst. manager. I ask her about it.
Here's what she said. We all know Islam is wrong and taking people to hell but to openly attack them
on TV in the very country where we are on the air is not right. We ask Hal to tone it down alittle and he
said I'll not comprimise one inch. We told him we want more stations on the air to preach Jesus and
you are hindering the process so we took him off the air. Sure he was winning the battle by proving
them wrong but with such hard retoric and no love he was loosing the War. Like it or not TBN wins a
lot of people to the Lord (baptists have a lot of air time onTBN. Jesus spoke the truth always but it
was always covered with LOVE
Aren't the unsaved worth more than winning a battle; all they seem to see is christians fighting. And to
make it worse Hal lindsay was on Hanity/Combs last night(a secular station Fox network) taking to
unsaved people and the nation about his battle with Paul Crouch. Two christians fighting over bible
doctrine in front of the unsaved world. Man there is a time and place for everything; that's the wrong
time and wrong place.
I know you say you're are pointing out the problems in other people's ministries and standing for truth.
Just think of that, a ministry pointing out other people's problems publicially.
But I know you and your mind-set, I really do and I know you are spiritually blind( not on doctrine but
on the WAR). Let me ask you one more time. Why no baptists on your site and why your zero
response to soul winning. If God would ask us, you and me, When is the last time you personally won
someone to my son Jesus, What would we say? I hope it's just this week!
I'm sure you're a good man, so go with God my brother
You really don't need to answer this letter, See you in Glory!
[45]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Since you don't wish to deal with an e-mail reply, I will answer briefly here. You know very well that
honesty is not the real issue, because, in my last reply, I removed that "straw man" argument you
created, but you have difficulty admitting that you have a hidden agenda. You are willing to claim
dishonesty in me, but you are willing to defend Paul Crouch when he has been dishonest with his
viewers by not being up-front with the reason for his dismissal of Hal Lindsay, and not announcing in a
formal declaration to all viewers and supporters regarding the policy of the network in relation to how
it deals with false religion. Paul Crouch is already on record as being unwilling to hear about or deal
with false doctrines taught by teachers and groups associated with and supported by TBN, but he has
not faced his audience and declared that those same standards apply to Islam as well.
The difficulty is not in what I think, but what the Bible says in relation to what you claim is acceptable.
The fact is, you have chosen not to deal with doctrinal issues also, regardless of what God may have
said or set as the standard, and you have set your own standards regarding the process of religion, in
which doing ministry is much more important to you than doing and defending what God has stated as
His doctrinal positions in relation to conduct by leadership. It is always easy to come to a consensus
by adopting the lowest common denominator that is acceptable to all parties involved, and that usually
precludes the assertion of doctrinal standards, regardless of the fact that they may have been
established by God Himself.
The issue is not about "soul winning" because neither you nor I accomplish the salvation of any soul,
since that is the domain of God. The job of the Christian is to present the gospel and then allow
God to claim the prize. If you wish to take credit for a work of God, then be my guest.
Unfortunately, the war you are fighting is the attempt to change the standards of the
Scripture to conform to your idea of who is qualified to be a leader, and the standard that you have
adopted is one that makes you feel comfortable and secure within the parameters of your chosen belief
system. The problem revealed in the Hall of Shame is one that affects every Christian leader, regardless
of what denomination or affiliation that they adopt, and the fact that you understand exactly what the
point of those examples happens to be, reveals that you are not really concerned about Baptists not
being listed, but with the fact that anyone is listed, which you would prefer not to face. The Scripture
states that there are standards to be applied to leadership which you reject, and in their place, you
insert
your own standards of conduct and then attempt to defend those standards by claiming that the person
who reveals the difficulty has more guilt than those who have violated the Scriptural prohibitions, and
therefore you can ignore the issue.
Just think, the apostle Paul pointing out the failure of the apostle Peter ... publicly! ... and recorded in
the Scripture for all time, Galatians 2:11-21. The Scriptural Hall of Shame is much more extensive than
the one found on the On Doctrine website, and I don't find a Baptist by your definition in the entire
group, so, I presume that invalidates the isssues raised in the Scripture as well.
#3
Just want to ask you... do your really read your Bible?
Queensland, Australia
[58]
#4
Leadership of your organization
Jesus said "He that is without sin cast the first stone"
Oral Roberts is not perfect just as none of you nor any human being perfect.
Oral Roberts never claimed to be perfect.
Healing prayers are not perfect.
JESUS WAS PREVENTED FROM HEALING 'BECAUSE OF UNBELIEF' of others, according to
the Bible. His own disciples were also prevented BECAUSE OF their and others UNBELIEF.
Daniel prayed a prayer in Daniel 9 and it was answered immediately.
Daniel prayed a prayer in Daniel 10 and it was answered immediately yet it took 21 days to
manifest.
ACCORDING TO THE ANGEL OF GOD DANIELS PRAYER WAS ANSWERED
IMMEDIATELY BUT HINDERED FOR 21 DAYS UNTIL IT BROKE THROUGH AND
MANIFESTED.
OLD TESTAMENT BELIEVERS COULD NOT AND DID NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORITY OR
PRIVLEDGE TO USE THE NAME OF JESUS, NOR HAD THE DEVIL BEEN DEFEATED YET
BY JESUS. New Testament believers have this power of attorney mandated from Jesus and authority
and RIGHT given to use his name to cast out devils, and over all the power of satan.
UNBELIEF even hindered Jesus. If it hindered Jesus how much does it hinder prayers of faith today. It
is important is it to remove unbelief today. The only way to pray is to pray in faith.
"without Faith IT is impossible please God " Hebrews 11:6
The prayer of faith will heal the sick.
According to Jesus there is a right and wrong way to pray.
THERE is a better way to pray.
Mark 11:23-34 (King James Version)
"For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou
cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall
come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.
Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them,
and ye shall have them."
Unless one prays in faith, without unbelief and doubt pulling against that faith, expecting a result
believing "What things soever ye desire, WHEN YOU PRAY, believe that you receive then prayers
will not yield results.
Faith is hindered by unbelief.
Prayer is hindered by unbelief.
My salvation is a product of a supernatural (all salvations is supernatural) visitation of Jesus resulting in
total deliverance from terminal illness and addiction. God still heals today and some people need others
to help them pray with power to overcome unbelief and all hinderance to health and healing. God still
manifests "Gifts of Healing" as in Corinthians and all the gifts of the spirit to help all believers.
Only those who believe will receive.
Your criticism of Oral Roberts is ONE SIDED, UNFAIR, AND PRJUDICIALLY BIASED AND
BIGOTED DUE TO YOUR LACK OF BIBLICAL KNOWLEDGE AND
UNBELIEF
Illinois, United States
[64]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I presume that you are defending Oral Roberts as a result of reading the article on the On Doctrine
website, Oral Roberts.
However, you deal with the minor portion of the article, which consisted of 2 paragraphs regarding
healing, and you do not deal with the major issue of false prophecy, which defines the reality of what
authority Oral Roberts possesses, according to Deuteronomy 18:20-22. Any revelatory prophecy
claimed to have been received by Oral Roberts, that eventually discloses that God is a liar, transcends
any other issue in relation to the ministry of Oral Roberts.
I have never claimed that Oral Roberts must live his life perfectly or that it is even a possibility that he or
any individual could accomplish that task. Only Jesus Christ lived a perfect life. However, that does not
eliminate the reality, that if a person claims to receive prophecies from God, that every one of those
prophecies must come true perfectly. In addition, those prophecies cannot reveal a God who is
different from the One found in the Scripture, Deuteronomy 13:1-11, which means that the prophecies
cannot reveal a God who is a liar, Numbers 23:19.
What you choose to believe about healing is between you and God, but your explanation does not go
to the heart of the issue, because you do not explain why all Christians are not healed. It is convenient
to claim that lack of faith prevents that from happening, but Oral Roberts would claim that healing is
part of the atonement, so why does it take additional and greater faith to be healed than it does to
obtain
salvation? And why has there been no mountain moved by the use of faith in the history of the Christian
church? Even the apostles did not effect that action.
Why was the apostle Paul not healed, despite his prayers to God? In the apostle Paul's conversations
with God, why did God not tell Paul that he was not using the proper prayer words or was defective in
the application of faith? Was there no other person to help him obtain the mystical prayer power that
would accomplish his desire to be healed? Why would the apostle Paul tell Timothy to use wine to
relieve his stomach ailment instead of giving him instruction in the proper method of prayer and the
application of faith to accomplish permanently what the wine could only help on a temporary basis?
There are a number of issues that must be considered in the New Testament record. Was martyrdom
Stephen's first choice instead of deliverance? Did he have faith to perform great signs and wonders
(Acts 6:8), but was lacking in faith to accomplish his own rescue? Why were the apostle Paul and Silas
beaten and put in prison? Did they not say the right prayer or have enough faith to change their
condition? Why did the apostle Paul not heal Trophimus, but left him sick at Miletus. Was Trophemus
deficient in faith, and if so, why did not Paul give him proper instruction? Why is there not at least one
Christian in the world who is centuries old and has not died because they were healed of every disease
that would end their mortality? That is the ultimate end of a belief in healing based on conditions of faith
and proper prayer. If those conditions accomplish healing in one instance, why do they not accomplish
healing in all instances? The reality is, that all Christians eventually die, and barring a death by accident
or some other outside influence, they will all die from the effects of some type of disease. So, how can
that be if the atonement provides healing?
The problem is, that if the actions and events in the lives of the major players in the New Testament do
not conform to those claims being made today, then it is time to consider why that is the case, and
whether those claims are really based on a biblical theology or simply what is wished to be found in the
Scripture.
#5
On your article on Christian Science....
you need to get your facts straight before putting up an article on the web that has many mistakes in it.
Your "opinions" about CS are just that, opinons. They are not factually based.
you are obviously a Baptist.
[67]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
If you have found factual errors in the article on the On Doctrine website, then you can send a list to me
along with the documentation and I will consider the issues.
The following statement is made on the On Doctrine About page:
"In the event that I misstate the facts or assume that which is untrue, I am willing to be corrected by a
genuine presentation of the facts and will admit to the errors that I make."
#6
I'm not a giant when it comes to scripture. I try not to use eloquence or superior wisdom in order to
help
out with the great commission. So don't expect your easily frustrated and altogether carnal flesh to be
tickled by these few written words(I hope my spelling and punctuation is OK!). The wisdom of God is
to
be shared among mature sons of God. Your webspace, and your time, could be used more effectively if
you diverted from your folly. It appears obvious to me, from a viewpoint based on minimal time
browsing
the world wide web, in which I stumbled upon your site, that you need to show some proof of your
relevance to these immature, if not babes in christ who also stumble accross your website. Maybe you
will proove to be a giant in the Kingdom of God. Maybe you should be deemed worthy to debase
every
minister of much fruit for whom God has set a table in the midst of their ememies. Maybe you will find a
better way to spend your time. I'll take this opportunity to say that I, in the space of a couple minutes,
became very angry as I read the dialogue produced in your web site. If this is the fruit you are
producing
on a daily basis then let your conscience do its thing. Not to the point of guilt. To the point of
repentance.
You obviously have a magnificent mind. Have you given thanks to God
[78]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Apparently you have found some area on the On Doctrine website where you have a disagreement.
Since
you have not stated what that disagreement might be, and you have provided no foundational
information
regarding your disagreement, then your criticism based on an emotional response is of no value, either
to
you or to me. It you are going to be critical, then you must state the nature and subject of your
criticism, and then you must provide a Biblical foundation for your disagreement if it is a doctrinal issue,
or
documentation indicating that an error of fact has been made. Until you are specific regarding your
disagreement, then I cannot respond in any meaningful manner to your note.
#7
AGREEMENT IN PRAYER
One other Scriptural form of prayer is the "prayer of agreement." Let us look at the Scripture that deals
with it because it truly is one of the "keys to the kingdom." While we read these verses let us keep in
mind that the main subject of these verses is asking or prayer, not "agreement." Matthew 18:18-19,
"Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye
shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on
earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in
heaven." For a clearer understanding of this Scripture let us quote from the Amplified Version of the
Bible,
"Truly, I tell you, whatever you forbid and declare to be improper and unlawful on earth must be what
is already forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permit and declare proper and lawful on earth must
be already permitted in heaven. Again I tell you, if two of you on earth agree (harmonize together,
together make a symphony) about -- anything and everything -- whatever they shall ask, it will come to
pass and be done for them by My Father in heaven."
Here we can see that our agreement is conditional since it must always be in concord with the Word of
God. God has many blessings and promises that belong to us as Christians, but they are not
"automatic," and they will only come as we keep the Biblical principles necessary to produce our prayer
answers. We cannot "bind" anything on earth that is not "bound" in heaven, or "loose" anything that is
not already "loosed" in heaven. So we can see that the aforementioned agreement must be more than
two people simply deciding that they want something and then asking for it together. Our prayers must
agree with the Word and Spirit of God. We must have both witnesses for them to meet the
requirements of valid prayer requests. Verse 16 of this chapter says, "...that in the mouth of two or
three witnesses every word may be established." A lot of people are agreeing on things that the Word
and Spirit of God are not in agreement with and are, therefore, not receiving their answers. We do not
just decide to "bind" somethi (end of document)
[82]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
The Amplified New Testament is not a translation of the original language, but is a paraphrase - a
statement by the author of a personal preference for what is wished that the Scripture should say rather
that what it may actually say. One of the problems with using a paraphrase in order to support a
particular doctrinal view, is revealed in how you use the Amplified to support an erroneous claim about
what Matthew 18:18-19 says.
Nothing is said in the original about unconditional legislation of right and wrong or that which is lawful or
unlawful. Nor does the original make any statement about the subject of an agreement being already
permitted or forbidden in heaven.
Secondly, there is no prayer mentioned in the verses and it is not mentioned in the original or in the
KJV, NAS, NIV or even in the Amplified version which you have quoted. The idea that the verses
represent a Prayer of Agreement is a fabrication that is inserted into the doctrine created outside of the
verses, which is an eisegetical application not supported within the text.
At the time when Jesus Christ gave the teaching, prior to His crucifixion, there was no church and there
were no Christians. The teaching was given to the apostles only, and is an example of apostolic
authority granted by Jesus Christ which cannot be usurped by any other individual or group, and is a
further extension of the granting of that authority in Matthew 16:19. The idea that there is some type of
mystical power granted to a person or persons because they decide to agree about the outcome of
some type of prayer request is foreign to the Scripture and is without foundation in the text.
The "agreement" is between the apostles, and represents their decision regarding the penalties to be
accessed against the sinning brother (or sister) who has not repented and asked for forgiveness, which
is the outcome of the process found in verses 15-17.
Apparently part of your message was lost in transmission which happens
sometimes when using a form, so I do not know what your final conclusion might be.
#8
I have been searching for a website to help witness to folks still stuck in dead, old and tradionary type
denominations. You website will be used to show some people where the twice dead plucked up
"evangelical pastors" who, "having a form a godliness but denying the power thereof" slanders (or
accussor of the breathern) doctrines have come from. You build your ministry by tearing down other
"legitimate" ones. Shame on you. You are in the same boat as the the "one" that does
accuse.
"Former" dead - southern (racist) BAPTIST
Oklahoma, United States
[97]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
A few examples or the areas on which you base your criticism and your biblical support would have
been
helpful. As it stands, your criticism is simply expressing a personal dislike without any specifics, which is
not helpful. In relation to some of your specific charges, I am not a pastor (even a twice-dead one),
On Doctrine is not a ministry (See the About page: www.ondoctrine.com/00about.htm ) and I have not
been associated with a denomination for 47 years. I am not sure how you apply the definition of
"power"
you claim that I deny in 2 Timothy 3:5, but a little explanation would have been helpful.
On Doctrine does not have any ministry to build, has no followers or congregation, but is simply an
informational resource which anyone can choose to use or ignore. I know that dealing with those pesky
doctrines gets in the way of what we would like to be the reality, but the primary issue on the website is
the question that is continually presented, Where is the authority, with the teacher or with the
Scripture?
Since you have become the accuser and state that I engage in slander, then I must presume that you are
claiming that I have lied, so if you have found deliberate and pervasive errors of fact on the website,
then you can notify me of the particulars and provide the documentation as a correction and if it is found
that I am in error, I will have no difficulty in posting a retraction.
SEE On Doctrine ABOUT page -- "So, why do you think you know so
much?"
#9A
Sir I have been blessed by Kenneth Copelands ministries. I see that you really don't know what you
are talking about because I have listened and read my Bible to understand what truth the servant of
God is imparting to those who desire a closer walk with God. It is obvious to me that you don't have
the infilling of the Holy Spirit in you life or you would consider what Paul the apostle and Peter states
about meslishes gossip can do. On judgement day I wouldn't want to be in your shoes. I will pray that
you will get a revelation of what the truth of the word is.
Alberta, Canada
[120]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Kenneth Copeland is quite clear about what he teaches and the Scripture is also quite clear about its
opposition to what he claims. There are very few orthodox doctrines that Kenneth Copeland has not
changed to conform to his own teachings.
It you have not done so, I suggest that you read the article in the Coversations section on the On
Doctrine website, Kenneth Copeland: What Did He Say?
#9B
You are violating on of God's laws and that is, don't bare false witness against other
Christians in the faith. If you feel that he is wrong pray for him, lift him up to the Lord
don't place on the web to damage him, you are no different than the High Priests of Jesus day.
Don't put your brother in Christ before public ridicule. That's exactly what the Jews did to Jesus
before he was Crucified. I pray that your spirit will be renew just as your mind should
be. Make sure you ask for forgiveness of any sin lurking in your life before you pray, especially
the one of bearing false witness. That is the Word of God from my Bible not Kenneth
Copeland's word. We are to rightly divide God's word and prove it by the way it works in our
life and searching it out in our own devotions. Just maybe he is stepping on you toes. We
are to follow Christ in power and Strength and people like you try their very best to stop God's power
here on the earth but I've read my Bible and know the end of the Story; Christ Jesus and those who
walk with him in spirit and truth WIN. His word states we are to be
ambassadors to the world. What type of ambassador are you sir? Does your truth spread Faith
and Trust in the hearts of those you seek it from your Website? It doesn't seem
that way to me. That is what I take from Brother Copeland's ministry; Truth and Faith, obvious you
don't know how to walk by Faith trusting God you all your needs according to his righteous in
Glory. It sounds to me you haven't taken the Lord Jesus out of your box you have him
in and seen him work miracles in your life; I have!
While I was ill I learned through Kenneth Copeland's ministry to put Christ first and he would
do the rest in my life. He is teaching people how to grow in Christ as mature
people. Satan would like us to stay weak and not compromise his mission to steal, kill and
destroy. Brother Copeland teaches us to love the Lord with all our heart, soul, mind and
body. That is exactly what Christ Jesus taught and also the apostles. The evidence
is the love of Christ shining in your life filled with his love and
forgiveness. I pray that God for gives you forgiveness for violating one of his
commandments. I pray that Jesus for gives you like he has me. I sounds to me
you need healing from authority issues. I know what that is because Satan made it his mission to
Battle my mind until I couldn't fight the good fight like Jesus tried to teach me. Remember when
we point a finger at someone three more are pointing write back at you sir. Satan is the accuser of
those who trust and follow the word of God to the letter. I didn't have that working in my life but
praise God through Kenneth Copeland's ministry, Benny Hinn's ministry and Joyce and Dave Meyers
ministries I've learned where my source of power is. Discontinue you false witness because you
will be held accountable for the destruction you cause in peoples lives. You are not a brother of
truth but a false witness doing damage to the Kingdom if you continue your website of
destruction! Maybe you should learn what the Lord Prayer shows us and learn how to
pray! I learned from Kenneth Copeland's ministries how to forgive those who tried to
destroy my life and grow strong in Christ Jesus. By the way that lines up with the
Word of God in my Bible.
One of the principals the Word teaches us to be salt to the world or we lose our flavor, it sound
like you have a spiritual problem that needs to be healed; something only Christ Jesus can heal.
Yes Jesus states in my Bible that we are the light of the world-like a city on a mountain, glowing
in the night for all to see. Don't hide your light a basket. Instead put in on a stand and let
it shine for all. By the way that is in Matthew 5:13-14. If I followed your light I would
crash on the rocks of life and I personally had enough of that in my life. I'm learning to stand on
the Word. Pray that I stay right before God's throne and last but not least, allow the Holy Spirit to
teach and corrected my thinking. As I change I see God's power being manifested in my
life. Oh, yes, before I forget the Words spoken by Jesus states, greater things we will do after
he leaves because his Holy Spirit will be demonstrated through us. That's for today and
everyday as Christians and ambassodors of Faith. Do you have on the garment of righteousness
in you life or self-centeredness that destroys people. It appears to me that you are
demonstrating the evil of this world not demonstrating the Kingdom of Heaven in the this world.
Think on this because it just may set you free from you selfish intent! Selfish intent breds
contempt, hate, separation plus kills and destroys in the name of the God of this world.
Remember as children of God we will know our Sheppard voice. Spread the Love of God, Joy,
peace, longsuffering, gentleness, mercy and grace. Are you doing that as a man of God?
I don't think so. The God of this world wants to always lead people down the wrong
path by using people who claim to be Christians but tear their brothers and sisters to shreds.
You sir are a user not a giver!
I will be praying the God gives you revelation and forgiveness for bearing false witness.
Alberta, Canada
[123]
#9C
I just sent you an email I hope you will read and realize the damage you have done by my husband.
Your sinful attitude has caused a diffiant propblem. You so call ministry is in error and I pray that your
are forgiven. My husband has been under conviction for sometime. Secretly he has been reaching out to
find the truth of Salvation. I know this because you have been the topic of conversation. He can't
understand why you folks seem to hate Kenneth Copeland so much. You have him in so much fear he
is once gain running away from Christ not to him. Thank you so very much. I pray that God deals with
the damage you have done. Christ has promised that when we pray believe in Faith that our prayers will
be answered. Thanks to your helpful website you have just delayed his salvation just a little.
Thanks
Alberta, Canada
[124]
#9D
After emailing you yesterday I have felt lead to email once again to give you some more
wisdom.
In Matt 18:19 - Jesus was speaking to his disciples say, "I also tell you this: If tow of you agree donw
here on earth concerning anything you ask, my Father in heaven will do it for you. For where tow or
three gather together because they are mine, I among them."
Are you callin every believer a liar when it comes to prayer? If so y ou are hypocrates and nee a lesson
in believing and receiving. Luke 6:37 States you must nno judge least you be judge with the same
judgement!
Obviously, Jesus had no patience with people just like you as far as I am concerned you demonstrate a
sinful attitude; you are pawns of Satan, He came to kill and destro, don't you think that what you say
before those in the world cause damage. Where is your prayer life, if you have any!
The Bible states that everything not of God will be brought to light and your appointed evil won't be the
onces to do it , it will be the Holy Spirit that accomplishes it.
Jesus told the church leaders and teachers of his day that they wash the outside and their inside is evil
and dirty. You should read matthew 23:23-26. I pray that you repent of your religious Spirit and ask
God to forgive of you sin. Your ways are not of God and he will reward you openly for the damage you
have done to men of God who desire God's will not their own. GET GOD OUT OF YOUR TOY
BOX AND PLACE HOM WHERE HE SHOULD BE, on the inside of your heart. Who appointed
you judge and jury of sin? I would really like to know just how high and mighty you really think you are
with your religious dead spirit.
Maybe you should read leviticus chapters 15-18. Then ask your self who is the one that reveals sin in
the herts of men. Is your life built on the pride of the flesh and the selfish intent of the heart or is one
operating in the love of Christ. Jesus was crusified by the same people in his day. I would be very
careful if i were you. What you reap you will sow that is another principal of Jesus you hypocrites
motivated by self importance.
Alberta, Canada
[126]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE: Re - 9B, 9C, 9D above:
The issues noted on the On Doctrine website concerning Kenneth Copeland and Benny Hinn are many
and also quite clear as to their relationship to the Scripture. It is a matter of convenience to denounce
me in the attempt to defuse and make those issues go away, but they are real issues in relation to the
Scripture and they will not go away.
The principal question asked on the On Doctrine website is, Who is the authority, the teacher or the
Scripture? You have made your choice in the matter and have chosen your teachers in place of the
Scripture. Until you make the Scripture the authority in your spiritual life, you will continue to defend
those teachers in the attempt to preserve those doctrines that they teach, which embody the elements
that you believe give you superior spiritual empowerment. However, since the Scripture is the authority
and the judge of all doctrines, it speaks for itself regarding the doctrines and statements of your
teachers. I have presented those issues from a biblical perspective and foundation, so I find it difficult to
understand why you would say that it is unclear or unknown why I am opposed to Kenneth Copeland's
teaching.
I will state the major issue in the clearest of terms, so there can be no question. The principal and
fundamental issue in relation to Kenneth Copeland and Benny Hinn is prophecy. Kenneth Copeland
claims the office of a prophet, "I've been called into the office of the prophet and teacher," August 26,
2004, with Oral Roberts and Richard Roberts, and Benny Hinn has stated numerous prophecies which
he claimed to have received from God.
So, you are faced with a decision that you must make. If you believe the Scripture as you claim, and
you believe that it is authoritative, then how can you reconcile the very words of God Himself in
Deuteronomy 18:20-22 with the false prophecies stated by Kenneth Copeland and Benny Hinn? In the
verses, how many false prophecies does it take to be declared a false prophet by God and what is the
authority possessed by that false prophet according to the words of God?
You can read the prophecies at:
Kenneth Copeland prophecy
Benny Hinn prophecies
Your teachers have prophesied that which did not come true, so they have spoken falsely and are
revealed to be false prophets by God. But the greatest sin that they perpetrate is the fact that the false
prophecies that they speak are claimed to be from God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, so they make
the Godhead to be liars in the face of a watching and listening world, and they do so without remorse,
without conscience and without repentance, never admitting to the fact that they are not true prophets
and have not received revelation from God.
Because you have accepted the authority of false prophets over your spiritual life, you have also
adopted their teachings as well, and as a consequence you misstate the Scripture in your attempt to
defend them by using their teachings in order to condemn me.
I have dealt in detail with Matthew 18:19 (actually Matthew 18:15-20 for the complete teaching of
Jesus Christ on the subject), which you will find to be very upsetting in relation to the belief in a Prayer
of Agreement that you have adopted from your teachers. You can find the article at:
Prayer of Agreement
Since the passage is a direct teaching by Jesus Christ, it is imperative that it be understood properly,
because what you now believe about verse 19 has no relation to what is being taught in the passage by
Jesus Christ.
I have dealt with the issue of judgment in the article on Matthew 7:1-5, which condemns judgment
based
on a personal human standard. However, the On Doctrine website deals with the biblical standards and
doctrines as applied to the doctrines and teachings of certain of your teachers, and not my own
standards that I have created. So, I will be judged by God if I use my own created standards, but not
those mandated in the Scripture. You can view the article at:
Why Do I Criticize God's Anointed?
You seem to believe that people who uphold the mandates of the Scripture are the sinners while those
who teach false doctrine and give false prophecies are the sanctified spiritual giants. How you can
justify that, I do not know, but that is part of the decision you are going to make, or, perhaps, have
already made. However you do not apply your claims about Luke 6:37 in your own life, because you
say, "I would really like to know just how high and mighty you really think you are with your religious
dead spirit," and have taken it upon yourself to judge me, and you do not seem to see the contradiction.
If judgment by your definition is forbidden to me, it is also forbidden to you, but since you are defending
your teachers, who adopt the same contradiction in the attempt to eliminate any critical evaluation of
their doctrines and conduct, it is also acceptable to you.
Not only have you criticized me, you have intimated that had I been living in the time of Jesus Christ I
would have been one of the many who criticized and ridiculed Him, and also that I would have been
one of the people who crucified Jesus Christ. It is becoming more popular to adopt that tactic, since
Richard Roberts has made the same inferences, but you only hurt your cause by using that approach.
because you are creating a fabricated scenario and judging me based on your own personal standard of
dislike rather than that found in the Scripture. So, I think you should review what you have written and
ask yourself why it is acceptable to violate what you claim to believe about Luke 6:37, and use that
violation as a means to assign fault in others.
You will have to explain why you are saying that I am bearing "false witness against other Christians in
the faith." Have I misquoted their words? Have I made-up words that they did not say? Have I said
that they believe what they do not? Have I lied about any of their statements or beliefs? Have their
prophecies come true that I said have not? Those elements are part of the definition of bearing false
witness, so if you find evidence of those being the case in the articles that I have written, then you can
present your case by bringing the evidence to bear and I will be happy to consider what you have to
say and state a retraction if you are found to be correct, SEE the On Doctrine
ABOUT page
So far, you have made a claim without the evidence.
#10
hello. i came upon your website after i was searching for a jesse duplantis DVD. after reading your
little 'review' why do you say it is false? after i read it my spirit started to feel uneasy and disturbed and i
felt liek i needed to write to you. why do you make out in the beggining when you mentioned an angel
telling jesse to go to sleep that it is unbelievable? i mean God cares about us and i am sure He would do
anything for our protection and would suplly our needs. is it really that hard for you to believe taht God
sent an angel to tell jesse to go to sleep becus he was worried about him? i just dont get that you would
think its all fiction.
if it is not of God then it will disapear if it is of God it will grow. look how his ministry is growing and
how many peoples eyes are being opened to the truth taht there is a God and He loves us. i maybeonly
a 16 year old girl from australia and i might not have the knowledge you seem to possess but i do know
that all this judging isnt right.
you said:
" We are now informed that Paradise has (1) not been destroyed, (2) paradise is a big place, and (3)
paradise completely surrounds the Holy City. Not only is this without any Biblical proof, but we seem
to have a dichotomy between Mrs. Baxter s revelation in our last section and Jesse s revelation now.
Jesus personally showed Mrs. Baxter that Paradise has been taken over by Satan in hell. Yet now, a
few years later we find that Paradise is now sort of the suburbs of heaven. Who are we to believe?
Which is it? Is Paradise in hell or in heaven?.."
why would satan take over paradise? dont you realise that God is more powerful than satan and how
could he destroy paradise? God would kick his butt if he did!
have you met God? have you seen heaven? i guess when we get there we will know, and if Mr
duplantis is right, how will you feel? i doubt his experience was of a demonic nature because wouldt
God be protecting him? he has all thought his life. his mother prayed over him and told God to be with
him always.
i dont have time to write alot but anothe thing taht disturbed me was the page where you display the
false pastors, prophets, evangelist....why would you put anotehr persons sin on display? would you like
it if somebody displayed your sin on a website? God counts all sin the same, there is no....'your sin is
greater than mine'....why would you do that? God has forgiven those who have asked for forgiveness...i
know that these people exist who are false and as a brother / sister in christ we need to be careful of
what we hear. but to showcase it on the net is horrible!! as believers in christ we need to show love to
one another not point the finger!
i hope you dont write back being mean spirited and think i'm a stupid girl, because like i said, i may not
be as educated in the word as you are but i know that the holy spirit shows me what is write and i can
honestly say that what i have read just doesnt seem write. please ask for Gods forgivness for these
things, dont judge what you have not seen.
Australia
[192]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
There are two authors regarding the article about Jesse Duplantis. The introduction until the Major
Doctrinal Issues category was written by me. Under the Major doctrinal Issues category, "The Night
Visitor" and "The Trip To Heaven" are articles written by Rev. Robert Liichow and consist of the red
type (quotes from Jesse Duplantis), black type (Rev. Liichow's comments), green type (quotes from the
Bible) and blue type (my comments which were inserted into Rev. Liichow's article).
If you have questions regarding Rev. Liichow's comments, they can be sent directly to him at:
Bliichow@juno.com
You can also visit his website at:
www.discernment.org
I think the article is quite clear in relation to the issues raised and why those issues are important. If you
wish for me to consider the questions that you have presented or any others, then I suggest that you
send them back to me with the approval of your parents and I will be happy to consider
them.
#11
Here's an idea, why don't you establish a firm stand on an issue. Seems like the only stand yu take for
or aginst anything is opposition. Richard and oral Roberts are men of God. They are men of God based
on the fruits in they're life not by thy're doctine. They have a university and a global ministry that has
reached thousands of lives, you have managed to establish a web page that fills people's minds with
doubt and lies. Congratulations onyou're feeble attempts to matter. if you want myu take on you, you're
just jealous and you have them both under a microscope because thay have alot of sway. Maybe you
should figure out what you believe instead of knocking everyone else for they're beliefs and actions. I
wish you luck with you're endeavor to destroy the church and kingdom of god, you will not succeed
and you're actions WILL NOT BE REWARDED!
Illinois, United States
[215]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
There are two questions with which you must eventually deal, but are refusing to consider at this time
because it is convenient to your belief system to ignore them.
1. How is it that a man claims to have received direct revelation from God and Jesus Christ, but those
claimed revelations make God and Jesus Christ into liars, and that man has never admitted to the issue,
has never repented of his claims and, in fact, has tried to create other explanations to justify his false
claims?
2. How is it that just last year a man mentioned my name and website on his television program and
then proceeded to make false statements about what I believed and never admitted to his error or
repented of what he knew were his own falsely created statements?
How are these men still considered to be men of God when the fruit of their testimony is to make God
and Jesus Christ into liars and to fabricate lies about what they claim another person believes? When
you can deal with the reality and serious nature of those issues and understand that you cannot provide
a biblical explanation by which you can justify their conduct, then maybe you will understand why the
On Doctrine website exists.
#12
Why are you such a self serving opinionated christian and bigot?
[217]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
If you will explain how self-serving applies, it would be appreciated. I am not sure why having an
opinion offends you, since you seem to have a few yourself. At least I have provided a biblical
foundation for my claims which you have not done. If I am a bigot, then you must define what that
means to you, provide a few examples and a defense of your position based on the Scripture is in
order, otherwise you are simply expressing your personal preference without any substantiation of fact.
#13
I AM A SIMPLE WOMEN OF GOD AND THE ENTIRE BIBLE IS LOVE ESPECIALLY IN
THE N/T JESUS DIED FOR US I KNOW AND BELEIVE A LOT OF PASTORS REPENTED
WHY BLAME THEM AS NOW THEY HAVE FULLY REPENTED TAKE JIMMY SWAGGET
THE LORD HAS RESTORED HIS MINISTRY BACK TO HIM I BELEIVE NOW WE SHOULD
PRAY AND LOVE AND ENCOURAGE THEM EVEN THOUGH SOME ARE STILL FALSE
LET THE LORD DEAL WITH THE MATTER
A VERY CONCERNED MISSIONARY DOING WORK IN (place name removed per On
Doctrine privacy policy)
Australia
[219]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Thank you for your visit and message on the On Doctrine Contact page.
The issue presented on the On Doctrine website is not about love, repentance or restoration. The issue
is about obedience to the commands of Scripture in relation to conduct on the part of leadership in the
church, but who ignore the biblical prohibitions against their conduct and refuse to accept the
consequences of their conduct.
The Lord is not waiting to deal with the matter in the future, because He has already given instructions
on the issue in the Scripture, which is one of the reasons that the Bible exists, 1 Timothy 3:1-13, Titus
1:5-16. The Scripture is the final guide in relation to Christian doctrine and conduct, and is authoritative
over the teachings of any leader.
The criteria specified and defined in the Scripture that determine the qualifications of a leader to hold
their position are not particularly difficult to understand or observe and are not onerous or unreasonable
in any manner. In fact, all Christians should observe the same standards, but they are absolutely
mandated by the Scripture in relation to leadership and are the measure of the fidelity of a leader to the
authority of the Scripture as measured by their adherence to those standards. In the event that there is a
failure to observe the standards, the public statements and visible expressions of true repentance, which
include renouncing a leadership position, are the indication that the Scripture is the authority in the life of
the individual.
Leadership is not a sacrosanct position in which conduct is condoned without consequences. There are
no entitlements in leadership and there cannot be any legitimate claims by any individual that their
position or ministry is so important or anointed that standards and consequences decreed in the
Scripture do not apply to them. It is a matter of convenience to ignore the mandate of Scripture in order
to maintain status or place, but that is just the opposite from the true calling of ministry and authority in
the church.
Yes, those who fail at any level in the church should receive prayers and in the event they truly repent,
they should be restored to fellowship. However, in the case of leaders, there is a very big difference
between being restored to fellowship and being restored to leadership. The Scripture does not provide
a means of restoration to leadership of those who violate the standards that qualify a person to
leadership. It is the action of human beings who return a person to their leadership position, but that
action is not viewed as legitimate by God.
The question is always the same, "Where does the authority lie, with the Scripture or with the leader?"
#14A
It was a saddening experience to have read your article on Carlton Pearson. I pray that your narrow
minded view on such a loving INTERPRETATION of the Bible Broaden so that you can see the truth.
This interpretation keeps in line with God's character, cleansing and refining fire, Love and His desire to
be victorious over man's sinful nature in order to reconcile his creation back to Himself. After all, if
Jesus died once for ALL sin which is in ALL man; Isn't His blood good enough, victorious enough to
make the "impossible" happen?
I think it is rather dangerous to think that we know all there is to know and stop at one particular
doctrine because it controls the masses and the money. This doctrine is a threat and concidered heresy
because it means God has the freedom to rule over man and it takes away the power from man to rule.
It is a sorry time when we see so many willing to go ankle deep.
~In His Freedom,
New York, United States
[229]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Thank you for your visit and message on the On Doctrine Contact page.
It may be a warm, fuzzy escape to accept Carlton Pearson's own version of Universalism, but it is just
that, his own idea not supported in the Scripture. If everyone is going to heaven, then the revelation of
God through the Scripture was quite unnecessary and the gospel message itself is a pointless exercise.
You are faced with he question found on the On Doctrine website, "Who is the authority, the teacher of
the Scripture?" You have chosen your teacher, because he tells you what you wish to believe about
yourself and defines a God that conforms to human invention as a matter of convenience.
See the article:
"The Gospel of Inclusion and Carlton Pearson"
www.ondoctrine.com/10pearso.htm
#14B
His own idea IS supported in the scriptures and has been proven to be the FIRST doctrine (idea)
taught ad believed by the earliest of christians in history. It is there. I am sure you must have seen the
many verses and studies and translations of words like "eternal" and "hell"? Warm and fuzzy? More like
victorious!
Hoping you look into more!
New York, United States
[284]
#15
I happened upon this website. It talks of pride at the top of the page quoting Proverbs 11:2. Whoever
created this website is so full of pride, it's disheartening. I can't believe the nerve of someone who feels
so spiritual that they can make a list of people and their sins. Have you ever heard of 1 corinthians 13?
The chapter talks about love. Read this particular verse: 1CO 13:5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it
is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Did you get that last part? It keeps no record of
wrongs. Hey, did you know that everyone, even the best of Christians sin? Did you know that God
forgives? Did you know that is the reason that christ came to earth was so that we call ALL, (you
included) be forgiven of our sins? since christ is our model and we are to live as HE lived, I wonder if
he would approve of this website? Doubt it. See, he opened his heart to those who were sinners. He
approached the woman at the well with love, he went home with Zacchaeus
Let me put it to you this way: Any bad thing that you can find on someone else...well, you've done
worse to God yourself. Be concerned about your own sin and leave the judging up to god. He's sitting
on the throune, you're not.
[290]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I have dealt with the majority of the issues that you raise in the FAQ's section on the website, in the
article, "Why Do I Criticize God's Anointed?"
www.ondoctrine.com/faqs/0faqs013.htm
The Scripture is concerned with much more than just a message of forgiveness, and one of those
elements is in relation to the qualifications of those who are considered to be pastors, teachers, elders
and deacons. There are specific standards applied to those offices, stated specifically in the Scripture
and to violate those standards is to be disqualified from the position. Those standards are stated in
1 Timothy 3:1-15 and Titus 1:5-11. The issue is qualification for leadership and the consequences of
failure to meet the biblical qualifications. It may not be convenient or comforting to face the reality that
conduct carries with it consequences outside the nature of forgiveness, but that is the case.
I don't believe that I indicated that there are individuals who do not sin. There is no such state on this
earth as sinless perfection. But sin in relation to forgiveness or restoration is not the issue, but conduct in
relation to consequences is the issue.
Adam and Eve disobeyed the command of God, forfeited a paradise in the Garden to be subjected to
the rule of the earth over their lives and saw the physical death of one son and the spiritual death of
another son who was a murderer.
Abraham suffered the humiliation of pagan kings on two occasions as a result of his lies and as a result
of a liaison with Haggar fathered a son who became the progenitor of a nation of people who oppose
Israel to this day.
Moses forfeited entrance into the land of promise as a result of his disobedience.
David's liaison with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah resulted in the condemnation of David by Nathan
the prophet and brought about the death of the baby that resulted from the immoral relationship and
eventually the death of his son Absalom, who was also the result of a relationship with Bathsheba.
As a result of the sins of Solomon, the kingdom was taken from his son Rehoboam.
As a result of their unbelief and false teaching, Jesus Christ condemned the scribes and Pharisees as
murderers and children of Satan.
As a result of his denial, Peter was humiliated in the presence of Jesus Christ just as He had predicted.
And as a result of his withdrawal from the Gentile converts, Peter was rebuked publicly by the apostle
Paul.
The Scripture is a continuous listing of conduct leading to consequences, whether the individuals were
unbelievers or true believers. So, on this issue, either the Scripture is authoritative or it is not. I leave
that decision to you after you consider 1 Timothy and Titus.
#16
You give no hope...You tear apart the scriptures in the same manner you accuse the others for using.
Your interpretations move the Bible into nothing more than a book to be read and enjoyed. It is almost
as if you have transfered the Bible into being no more than a bunch of biographies....interesting, and
even examples of way to live...but no more than that.
Florida, United States
[313]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I am quite puzzled why you would state that I give no hope. If you would give a few examples of
Scriptures that you consider that I am tearing apart and a biblical defense of your position, it would be
helpful. Unless you provide that information, then you have simply stated an emotional reaction to
something that you dislike without any substance to the matter.
#17
I was interested that you criticize preachers who "claim" that God has needs.
God has personally appeared to me several times inthe last year since April 2005.He has shown me
His hands tied together as with a rope. And He says to me THAT " I need My Children."
At Christmas time last year I was preparing to travel abroad for holidays.He came to me twice in a
dream.Once on 17 th Dec. and then on New Years eve....In both these dreams He emphasized to me
how sad He was because He has no access to most of His Children .He wants to love , hold , feed ,
care talk , hug Hiis Children.But there is a tremendous problem .A His Children have trapped
themselves into situations which legally keep God away from them.
For example those who are trapped in unforgiveness because they have disobeyed 1 Cor.6 vs 1-11.
ie.Do not sue fellow Believers.
This situation causes a breach in the relationship between the Christian & God..... because He cannot
recognize or listen to any of their prayers that seek forgiveness of THEIR SINS. Coz of the stipulation
in Mark 11 vs 26. That if you do not forgive others....God cannot forgive you.
So these Children of God who are separated from Our Father in this way.....ARE A NEED THAT
GOD HAS. He wants to have them back in His arms....but He cannot.He needs o love His
Children....but He cannot. So He was asking me to set aside my Holidays over those weeks last
year.....TO INTERCEDE .To specifically pray for these children all over the world who are tied up in
litigation against fellow Christians. Because until you cancel these cases or debts or problems.....
through forgiveness, you tie God's Hands up.He cannot relate properly to you.
This is a REAL NEED THAT GOD HAS. He has asked me many times to pray for HIS NEEDS. He
always tells me of His needs of these types as well as many types of cases which are spiritually
complicated for you to understand UNLESS He Himself has revealed it to you. If you really think
about it...A Person who loves His children ,who are REBELLIOUS or IGNORANT of His
requirements, has to have a problem and a need. He needs to hold His Children and love them and do
miraculous things for them, but His Children are continually mistrusting Him and turning away from Him.
The biggest problem that God has today ...is that despite His giving Jesus to die for us.....most
Christians still do not believe fully in that Blood Covenant or in what God did for us through THAT
DEATH and RESURRECTION. He has needs for so many things that I cannot explain it to you all. He
wants Jesus to come back.The mansions are ready for us...but we are still soaked in filth. How can
Christ come back to pick a Bride whose clothes are filthy, mudd
Yes ....God has needs. He really wants to clean us up, but He can't .We are too trapped in THE devils
schemes.Unforgiveness as I mentioned above is only ONE such example. Think ! Count ! How many
people do you know who are tied up in issues of legal cases where they have sued, reported or
complained ? Unless they wipe out or let go of those cases , files & issues, they cannot enter Heaven.
I am someone who has this calling or assignment of prayer /intercession for many of God's needs.
MANY. So I feel confident to ask you to relent and apologize to those preachers , since it will not help
you to go to Heaven if you have made false accusations to your Brothers in Christ.....due to your lack
of knowledge.Probably before no one had explained it to you. Now you know. So there is no excuse.
Yes, God Has Needs.
They arise out of His Love & Mercy for His Children.
Be Blessed.
United Kingdom
[320]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
What I know for absolute certainty is what is found in the Scripture, and nowhere is it stated that God
has a need that can be satisfied by human beings. Your claim to a revelation notwithstanding, when you
are able to base your claim on a Scriptural foundation, then and only then can it be considered truth.
#18
This site is heartbreaking. After fifteen minutes of browsing, I suspect that it exists, not to clarify and
drive more individuals to an understanding that all must be supported by scripture - whether what we
hear comes from Billy Graham, John MacArthur, Kenneth Copeland. The individual believer is always
accountable to know and study the scripture and evaluate all they hear and read.
This, however, seems to be a "better watch out" so you can be right like "us", believe like "us" and oh,
by the way, support that we are RIGHT.
There is a saddening insidious venom here that cannot be construed to build the body of Christ or
demonstrate Christian love to the world and the body.
I think, perhaps, with the Lord's help - you should reconsider your motives here in light of God's word
and the leading of the Comforter sent to guide.
Florida, United
States
[321]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I think the basis of your criticism is that you have found an issue on the website with which you disagree
with either my presentation or that of another individual. You are quite welcome to question my
motives, but in relation to what issue(s)? I quite understand that I may not always be right, but on the
other hand I am not always wrong, so if you would state the particular issue(s) in question and provide
your biblical defense of your position, it would be appreciated.
#19
I would like to clear up some misunderstandings in your article about the Seventh-day Adventist
Church.
I have only skimmed your article so far, but there is a certain fact that doesn't seem to surface in your
presentation of E. G. White. She never claimed that her writings were infallible or given directly word
by word from God, but rather that she had gotten ideas or visions from God, which she then wrote
down - using her own words to her best ability. You wrote that they were direct words from God. That
is a misunderstanding.
I am sure there are more issues that are misunderstood as you judge our church as being a church of
Heresy. If you would be interested I would like to explain some more points for you so that you can
give a more realistic view of our church.
Thank you,
Denmark/England
[324]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
You are welcome to send any information for me to consider that you believe would clarify or change
my view of Seventh-day Adventist belief.
I find it interesting that you are willing to adopt a position that the pronouncements of Ellen G. White
might not have been as authoritative as believed because she wrote with her own words. That would
open the possibility that perhaps there was even error in her pronouncements as a result of some
semantical confusion of language. If you wish to maintain the integrity of SDA doctrine, I am not sure
that you wish to adopt that particular viewpoint. I am aware of her statement regarding her own words:
"Although I am as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in writing my views as I am in receiving
them, yet the words I employ in describing what I have seen are my own."
Selected Messages, book 1, p. 37, 1867
However, her statement begs the issue, because what she saw and heard in her trances and visions
were claimed to be the direct revelation of God, so what she wrote using her own words in relation to
those revelations are her attempts to accurately portray what she was given. Why she chose her own
words rather than the direct quotes from God would seem to be quite strange, although not so strange
regarding descriptive events, but the reality is that the words she spoke were said to be authoritative
and binding on the church.
"In ancient times God spoke to men by the mouth of prophets and apostles. In these days He
speaks to them by the Testimonies of His Spirit."
Testimonies for the Church, vol. 4, pp. 147¡148, Testimony 27, 1876
The Testimonies are only defined within the context of a revelation, and that revelation being given to
Ellen G. White which she passed on to the church in her "Testimonies."
"If you lessen the confidence of God's people in the testimonies He has sent them, you are
rebelling against God as certainly as were Korah, Dathan, and Abiram."
Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5, p. 66, Testimony 31, 1882
In the following, Ellen G. White gives the explanation of why she wrote in her own words. Just as did
the writers of the Bible, she claims that she wrote in the same manner as they and with equal authority:
"The Bible points to God as its author; yet it was written by human hands; and in the varied style
of its different books it presents the characteristics of the several writers. The truths revealed are all
'given by inspiration of God' (2 Tim. 3:16); yet they are expressed in the words of men. The Infinite
One by His Holy Spirit has shed light into the minds and hearts of His servants. He has given dreams
and visions, symbols and figures; and those to whom the truth was thus revealed, have themselves
embodied the thought in human language. {1SM 25.1}
"The Ten Commandments were spoken by God Himself, and were written by His own hand.
They are of divine, and not human composition. But the Bible, with its God-given truths expressed in
the language of men, presents a union of the divine and the human. Such a union existed in the nature of
Christ, who was the Son of God and the Son of man. Thus it is true of the Bible, as it was of Christ,
that 'the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us' (John 1:14). {1SM 25.2}
"Written in different ages, by men who differed widely in rank and occupation, and in mental and
spiritual endowments, the books of the Bible present a wide contrast in style, as well as a diversity in
the nature of the subjects unfolded. Different forms of expression are employed by different writers;
often the same truth is more strikingly presented by one than by another. And as several writers present
a subject under varied aspects and relations, there may appear, to the superficial, careless, or
prejudiced reader, to be discrepancy or contradiction, where the thoughtful, reverent student, with
clearer insight, discerns the underlying harmony. {1SM 25.3}
"As presented through different individuals, the truth is brought out in its varied aspects. One
writer is more strongly impressed with one phase of the subject; he grasps those points that harmonize
with his experience or with his power of perception and appreciation; another
p; 26
seizes upon a different phase; and each, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, presents what is most
forcibly impressed upon his own mind--a different aspect of the truth in each, but a perfect harmony
through all. And the truths thus revealed unite to form a perfect whole, adapted to meet the wants of
men in all the circumstances and experiences of life. {1SM 25.4}
"God has been pleased to communicate His truth to the world by human agencies, and He
Himself, by His Holy Spirit, qualified men and enabled them to do His work. He guided the mind in the
selection of what to speak and what to write. The treasure was entrusted to earthen vessels, yet it is,
none the less, from Heaven. The testimony is conveyed through the imperfect expression of human
language, yet it is the testimony of God; and the obedient, believing child of God beholds in it the glory
of a divine power, full of grace and truth." {1SM 26.1}
The Integrity of the Testimonies
"In perfect harmony with this are my statements found in the article The Testimonies
Slighted,; written June 20, 1882, and published in Testimonies for the Church, volume 5,
No. 31, pages 62-84. From this I quote for your consideration, several paragraphs: {1SM 26.2}
"Many are looking with self-complacency upon the long years during which they have advocated
the truth. They now feel that they are entitled to a reward for their past trials and obedience. But this
genuine experience in the things of God in the past, makes them more guilty before Him for not
preserving their integrity and going forward to perfection. The faithfulness for the past year will never
atone for the neglect of the present year. A man's truthfulness yesterday will not atone for his falsehood
today. {1SM 26.3}
"Many excused their disregard of the testimonies by saying, 'Sister White is influenced by her
husband; the testimonies are molded by his spirit and judgment.' Others were seeking to gain something
from me which they could construe to justify their course or to give them influence.
p; 27
It was then I decided that nothing more should go from my pen until the converting power of God was
seen in the church. But the Lord placed the burden upon my soul. I labored for you earnestly. How
much this cost both my husband and myself, eternity will tell. Have I not a knowledge of the state of the
church, when the Lord has presented their case before me again and again for years? Repeated
warnings have been given, yet there has been no decided change.... {1SM 26.4}
"Yet now when I send you a testimony of warning and reproof, many of you declare it to be
merely the opinion of Sister White. You have thereby insulted the Spirit of God. You know how the
Lord has manifested Himself through the Spirit of prophecy. Past, present, and future have passed
before me. I have been shown faces that I had never seen, and years afterward I knew them when I
saw them. I have been aroused from my sleep with a vivid sense of subjects previously presented to my
mind and I have written, at midnight, letters that have gone across the continent, and arriving at a crisis,
have saved great disaster to the cause of God. This has been my work for many years. A power has
impelled me to reprove and rebuke wrongs that I had not thought of. Is this work of the last thirty-six
years from above or from beneath? ... {1SM 7.1}
"When I went to Colorado I was so burdened for you that, in my weakness, I wrote many pages
to be read at your camp meeting. Weak and trembling, I arose at three o'clock in the morning to write
to you. God was speaking through clay. You might say that this communication was only a letter. Yes,
it was a letter, but prompted by the Spirit of God, to bring before your minds things that had been
shown me. In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the
Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper, expressing merely my own ideas.
They are what God has opened before me in vision--the precious rays of light shining from the throne....
{1SM 27.2}
"What voice will you acknowledge as the voice of God? What power has the Lord in reserve to
correct your
p; 28
errors and show you your course as it is? What power to work in the church? If you refuse to believe
until every shadow of uncertainty and every possibility of doubt is removed, you will never believe. The
doubt that demands perfect knowledge will never yield to faith. Faith rests upon evidence, not
demonstration. The Lord requires us to obey the voice of duty, when there are other voices all around
us urging us to pursue an opposite course. It requires earnest attention from us to distinguish the voice
which speaks from God. We must resist and conquer inclination, and obey the voice of conscience
without parleying or compromise, lest its promptings cease, and will and impulse control. {1SM
27.3}
"The word of the Lord comes to us all who have not resisted His Spirit by determining not to
hear and obey. This voice is heard in warnings, in counsels, in reproof. It is the Lord's message of light
to His people. If we wait for louder calls or better opportunities, the light may be withdrawn, and we
left in darkness.... {1SM 28.1}
"It pains me to say, my brethren, that your sinful neglect to walk in the light has enshrouded you in
darkness. You may now be honest in not recognizing and obeying the light; the doubts you have
entertained, your neglect to heed the requirements of God, have blinded your perception so that
darkness is now to you light, and light is darkness. God has bidden you to go forward to perfection.
Christianity is a religion of progress. Light from God is full and ample, waiting our demand upon it.
Whatever blessings the Lord may give, He has an infinite supply beyond, an inexhaustible store from
which we may draw. Skepticism may treat the sacred claims of the gospel with jests, scoffing, and
denial. The spirit of worldliness may contaminate the many and control the few; the cause of God may
hold its ground only by great exertion and continual sacrifice, yet it will triumph finally. {1SM 28.2}
"The word is: Go forward; discharge your individual duty, and leave all consequences in the
hands of God. If we move forward where Jesus leads the way we shall see His triumph, we shall share
His joy. We must share the
p; 29
conflicts if we wear the crown of victory. Like Jesus, we must be made perfect through suffering. Had
Christ's life been one of ease, then might we safely yield to sloth. Since His life was marked with
continual self-denial, suffering, and self-sacrifice, we shall make no complaint if we are partakers with
Him. We can walk safely in the darkest path if we have the Light of the world for our guide.... {1SM
28.3}
"When the Lord last presented your case before me, and made known to me that you had not
regarded the light which had been given you, I was bidden to speak to you plainly in His name, for His
anger was kindled against you. These words were spoken to me: 'Your work is appointed you of God.
Many will not hear you, for they refused to hear the Great Teacher; many will not be corrected, for
their ways are right in their own eyes. Yet bear to them the reproofs and warnings I shall give you,
whether they will hear or forbear.'"... {1SM 29.1}
"In connection with these quotations, study again the article "The Nature and Influence of
the Testimonies," in Testimonies, volume 5, pages 654-691. {1SM 29.2}
"The statement which you quote from Testimony No. 31 {volume 5, page 67} is correct:
"In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the
Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas.
They are what God has opened before me in vision --the precious rays of light shining from the
throne." It is true concerning the articles in our papers and in the many volumes of my books. I
have been instructed in accordance with the Word in the precepts of the law of God. I have been
instructed in selecting from the lessons of Christ. Are not the positions taken in my writings in harmony
with the teachings of Jesus Christ? {1SM 29.3}"
A Letter to Dr. Paulson
St. Helena, California
June 14, 1906
From: Ellen G. White database - ellengwhiteestate.org
http://egwdatabase.whiteestate.org/nxt/gateway.dll/egw-comp/section00000.htm/bo
ok04543.htm/chapter04547.htm
As you must know, there is a great controversy within SDA leadership regarding the role of Ellen G.
White as she relates to the current organization. Basically there are those who wish to retain her
authoritative position in relation to the pronouncements that she made, and there are those who would
like to see her lost to history and disappear from the SDA record. There are many different matters in
her life regarding conduct and doctrine that are now an embarrassment to the church and muddy the
issue of the church attempting to be considered more mainstream within orthodox circles.
The major hurdle to overcome is not so much that SDA doctrine is different from traditional orthodoxy,
a reality that does not concern the orthodox church so much today which increasingly bases its theology
on emotions, but that much of the historical doctrine of the SDA church is based on the
pronouncements or "Testimonies" of Ellen G. White that are extra-biblical in nature. What
many in the church would like to see is the elimination of the authoritative claims of Ellen G. White while
still maintaining historical SDA doctrine, which they believe would allow a more compliant relationship
with orthodoxy. But the reality is that the SDA church would not exist if it had not been for Ellen G.
White and her "Testimonies," so a historical disassociation from her as the foundation of the
church and its doctrines is very difficult to do.
By any rational definition of the gift of prophecy, a person who receives revelation from God and gives
that revelation to others is considered to be a prophet, not only as a conduit of truth but as a lineal
continuation of the historical biblical prophets defined in the Scripture. The SDA church claims that
Ellen G. White had the gift of prophecy and expressed the gift of prophecy, by which she is defined as
a prophet. Regardless of how she expressed what are considered by the SDA church to be prophecies,
if she did not accurately convey the message and intent of God, but instead confused the issue through
the aberrant use of human words, then she stated false prophecy and false revelations and is a false
prophet as defined in Deuteronomy.
"One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant
church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are
a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance,
instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and
experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)"
Fundamental Beliefs, #18
http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html
There are revelatory passages in her "Testimonies" where Ellen G. White does quote the
words of God she claims were given to her in a revelation, i.e. the quote above, "These words
were spoken to me: 'Your work is appointed you of God. Many will not hear you, for they refused to
hear the Great Teacher; many will not be corrected, for their ways are right in their own eyes. Yet bear
to them the reproofs and warnings I shall give you, whether they will hear or forbear,'" although
not all of those "Testimonies" are presented in the manner of direct quotes. I thought I had
made that point clear in the article, but on rereading the section, I find that it is not as clear as intended.
I have rewritten a paragraph and noted the distinction between the revelations in which she quoted God
directly and those revelations which she stated the content in her own words. However, the point is, her
"Testimonies" were presented as being just as authoritative when stated in her own words
as if they were the direct quoted words of God, which places a mantle of authority on her shoulders
which is much greater than I believe you wish to accept.
#20
Dear Sir or Mam,
Oral Roberts did not claim that Bakker was innocent. He merely stated that Swaggart was attacking
God's annointed. Even David honored King Saul who was a wicked man because he was God's
annointed. It is true that Bakker commited grevious sins against the Lord. He was however called to the
office of evangelist and should have been dealt with by his brother (Swaggart) as the bible says ( bring
2 witnesses- repremand them privately- then publicly if they do not repent). Our call as believers is not
to publicly humiliate and accuse each other. We will know believers by their fruits but isn't interesting
that the warning that Oral Roberts gave to Swaggart was exactly what happened?
Matthew 7
Judging Others
1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged,
and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
Arizona, United States
[382]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
The argument that God gave Oral Roberts a revelation regarding procedural matters instead of
identifying the gross immorality and depravity that were the core issues is a matter of convenience in
order to justify Oral Roberts, move Jim Bakker into the realm of untouchability and place the guilt on
Jimmy Swaggart. There is no question that Oral Roberts was defending Jim Bakker rather than
condemning a procedural violation, and he was willing to use a fabricated revelation to do it. But, even
if it were as you say, allow me ask some questions and make some comments.
The problems within the AOG organization existed prior to the Swaggart/Bakker nonsense, because
both men were members of the organization and in competition with each other. There was a bad
feeling between the two men that was well known and the AOG had not stepped in to resolve the issue.
So it did not take a revelation to show the dissention that already existed.
Who says God called Jim Bakker to the office of an evangelist? Did God make any statement to the
church to that effect? The only person who makes that claim is Jim Bakker, who was a documented
liar, thief and moral deviate.
Where in the Scripture does it say that spiritual leaders are exempt from scrutiny by the Scripture or by
any other means? Was the apostle Paul exempt from scrutiny of his doctrines by the Bereans (Acts
17:11), or was the apostle Peter exempt from public condemnation by the apostle Paul for improper
conduct (Galatians 11-14)? The apostle Paul condemned the apostle Peter publicly.
You erroneously use 1 Chronicles 16:22 as your foundation, because to "touch" in the verse means to
physically strike or abuse and has nothing to do with revealing sinful behavior in the life of an individual.
That verse is used by leaders who wish to exempt themselves from accountability, which is exactly the
manner in which Oral Roberts utilized it in the case of Jim Bakker.
What Oral Roberts was saying was that everyone should have simply left Jim Bakker alone; better to
leave the sins covered and buried than to reveal one of the "anointed" as being one of the
depraved.
You must also presume that Jimmy Swaggart was also "anointed," so, there were two "anointed"
preachers opposing each other and there is presumed to be some proper format which two moral
deviates must follow while they engage in their own little personal war?
However, the issue with Oral Roberts is again what he claimed to be the case but which the Scripture
denies.
1. He claimed that Jim Bakker was God's anointed, but the reality is that Jim Bakker was disqualified
from any leadership position within the church because of his illegal and immoral behavior, 1 Timothy
3:1-13, Titus 1:5-16. Any pretext that Jim Bakker carried with him some type of anointing by God is
the product of a fanciful imagination. The same goes for Jimmy Swaggart as well. Both men continue
today in their "ministries" as leaders, and continue to violate the Scriptures that they claim to
believe.
2. He claimed that "discord" would come back to Jimmy Swaggart because he was "sowing discord."
How interesting that God was more concerned with unity and harmony between two immoral
fornicators who were both unqualified and already disqualified from their position in ministry by the
direct statement of the Scripture. Discord did not come back to Jimmy Swaggart, it was already there,
because he had already brought down Marvin Gorman, another AOG moral violator, who was already
out to get Jimmy Swaggart. It was only a matter of time before Marvin Gorman would catch Jimmy
Swaggart in his first compromising situation and document the event with photographs. But all of this
was happening prior to Oral Roberts' "revelation" about discord.
3. He claimed that if the AOG organization did not stop their actions against Jim Bakker, that "the hand
of the Lord" would fall on it/them. So, when did that happen?
4. He claimed that if the AOG organization was "touching God's anointed" by acting against Jim
Bakker, but, the reality was that Jim Bakker was already disqualified from his position by biblical
mandate.
5. He claimed there would be great dissention in the ranks of the Charlotte Observer newspaper. So
when did that actually happen? The other charge that he made was that the Charlotte Observer had set
themselves up as a "standard of morality." I do not know how their insistence that a moral violator be
called
to accountability is considered to be a self-serving moral standard. Perhaps Oral Roberts should have
looked in the Scripture and found where Abraham was called to accountability twice; once by Pharaoh
in Genesis 12:10-20 and then by Abimelech in Genesis 20:1-18, and Isaac was called to accountability
by
Abimelech in Genesis 26:1-11.
The only charge against the Charlotte Observer that he got right was that they had made an unholy
alliance with Jimmy Swaggart, which was the case, since he was not under any special anointing from
God.
The reality is, that you must deal with everything that Oral Roberts said in relation to what he claimed to
have received as a revelation from God. If a thousand claims were actually true and only one was false,
Oral Roberts would still be a false prophet. Prophets are not true based on a percentage of right and
wrong, but on the basis of every point of revelation being true. On that point, Oral Roberts has failed
the test of a true prophet.
I have addressed many of these issue in an article in the FAQS section:
"Why Do I Criticize God's Anointed?"
#21
Kenneth Copeland is the first and only minister I have ever heard that makes the Word of God make
sense. I don't think you have spiritual eyes to see or ears to hear. I am not putting you down, you just
"aren't there" yet. Kenneth Copeland is not saying that we give God orders. Not at all! He is saying
that God's Word is true, God is not a man that He should lie, and that anything you ask (according to
His will,) He will do! That is called Faith. Why is that so hard to understand? He is also one of the
only people in ministry today that absolutely says we must be, first and foremost, totally obedient to
God, and in His perfect will. He and his wife are true believers, with such sincere hearts for the Lord
Jesus. I have never known anyone who loves the Lord more, and wants to walk in total obedience,
than they do. It is so obvious, if you are spiritually discerning, to see that. They love Jesus with all their
hearts and I don't just think, but know that either of them would give up all the --- [rest of
message lost in transmission]
California, United States
[402]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Welcome to On Doctrine.
Thank you for your visit and message on the Contact page.
Kenneth Copeland tells you what you wish to believe about yourself and about the nature of God in
relation to humanity. There is a difference between what the Bible says and what Kenneth Copeland
says, and it does not take any spiritual ability to understand the discrepancies
I suggest you read the article on the On Doctrine website:
"Kenneth Copeland - What Did He Say?"
www.ondoctrine.com/conversa/3word001.htm
Also:
"Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Mark 11:12-23 and False
Prophecies"
www.ondoctrine.com/conversa/3word004.htm
There are many resources on the On Doctrine website, so please come back again for a visit.
#22
[PORTION OF ARTICLE QUOTED FROM THE ON DOCTRINE WEBSITE ARTICLE
ABOUT JESSE DUPLANTIS:
Jesse Duplantis]
----------------------
MAJOR DOCTRINAL ISSUES
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visions and Transports To Heaven
Jesse Duplantis
THE NIGHT VISITOR
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Extraordinary Mystical Transports & Angelic Visitations to Jesse Duplantis Word of Faith
"Evangelist", by Robert S. Liichow
Copyright 1998-2000 by Rev. Robert S. Liichow. All rights reserved
Inner City Christian Discernment Ministry
NOTE: Empasis by the author, Robert S. Liichow
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
END OF PORTION OF ARTICLE QUOTED FROM THE ON DOCTRINE WEBSITE
=====================================================================
Rom 14:3 Do not let him who eats despise him who does not eat; and do not let him who does not eat
judge him who eats, for God has received him.
Rom 14:4 Who are you that judges another's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. But he will
stand, for God is able to make him stand.
Rom 14:5 One indeed esteems a day above another day; and another esteems every day alike. Let
each one be fully assured in his own mind.
Rom 14:6 He who regards the day regards it to the Lord; and he not regarding the day, does not
regard it to the Lord. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat,
does not eat to the Lord, and gives God thanks.
Who Are You?
[PORTION OF ARTICLE QUOTED FROM THE ON DOCTRINE WEBSITE ARTICLE
ABOUT JESSE DUPLANTIS:
Jesse Duplantis]
=====================================================================
THE TRIP TO HEAVEN
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Extraordinary Mystical Transports & Angelic Visitations to Jesse Duplantis Word of Faith
"Evangelist", by Robert S. Liichow
Copyright 1998-2000 by Rev. Robert S. Liichow. All rights reserved
Inner City Christian Discernment Ministry
NOTE: Empasis and underline by the author, Robert S. Liichow
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
END OF PORTION OF ARTICLE QUOTED FROM THE ON DOCTRINE WEBSITE
=====================================================================
Where do you get off being so shallow and putting God in such a small box?
2Co 12:1 Indeed, it is not profitable for me to boast. For I will come to visions and revelations of the
Lord.
2Co 12:2 I know a man in Christ fourteen years before (whether in the body, I do not know; or
outside of the body, I do not know; God knows) such a one was caught up to the third Heaven.
2Co 12:3 And I know such a man (whether in the body, or outside of the body, I do not know; God
knows),
2Co 12:4 that he was caught up into Paradise and heard unspeakable words, which it is not allowed
for a man to utter.
2Co 12:5 I will glory of such a one, yet I will not boast on my behalf, except in my weaknesses.
2Co 12:6 For if I desire to boast, I shall not be foolish. For I will speak the truth. But I spare, lest
anyone should think of me as being beyond what he sees me, or hears of me;
2Co 12:7 and by the surpassing revelations, lest I be made haughty, a thorn in the flesh was given to
me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be made haughty.
Australia
[417]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
If you wish to place Jesse Duplantis in the same category as the apostle Paul, then you can appeal to 2
Corinthians 12, but since he is unable to perform with the same apostolic credentials as the apostle
Paul, the passage has no connection to his claims. You are simply left with a man who says he went to
heaven for a visit but can present no credible credentials to back his claim. I can make the same claim,
but it would be ludicrous for anyone to take my claim seriously, which is the same situation in relation to
Jesse Duplantis.
Jesse Duplantis and his associates in Word of Faith theology place God in the smallest of all possible
boxes, because they subject God to the actions of human beings by which He is prevented from acting
according to His will or is commanded to act according to the will of human beings. God is also claimed
to be subject to certain laws, their source and authority is mysterious beyond comprehension and He is
also subject to the agreements made between human beings by which they determine what is best for
them and then make a claim on God to grant those requests. God is not even in possession of his own
creation, supposedly loosing control to Adam when he fell and ownership then falling into the hands of
Satan over which God has no legal authority. It takes the cooperation of man in order to give God the
avenue and authority to recover his own created possession from Satan who is also a created being
himself, but apparently not subject to God but can be "bound" by human preachers.
You serve a weak and powerless God who is not sovereign over His own creation and is subject to
laws not of His creation over which he has no authority.
The issue with Jesse Duplantis and his claims is not that I place God in a box but that I demand that
Jesse Duplantis present his credentials and confirm his claims which he cannot do. Anyone can make a
claim simply by opening their mouth and making a statement, but it is much more difficult to prove the
assertion.
#23
SHAME ON ALL OF YOU! WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO GET THE GOSPEL
THROUGHOUT THE WORLD? NEVER HEARD OF you BEFORE!
Washington, United States
[422]
#24
WHOEVER WROTE THIS
honestly whoever wrote all of this on the mormon church is rediculous. you need to know you facts
before you write them. speaking from something you know soo little about. and you say that the
testimony's of the book of mormon that people wrote are unreliable, why are they unreliable. cuase you
don't believe in them? and isn't a testimony something that they feel inside and what they truly believe,
so saying that gives us the conclusion that you can not prove that their testimony's are true. so saying
that they are unreliable is a very ignorant thing to say... if you could even get a testimony then you would
understand. but at the rate your going and all the time you seem to have on your hands about writing all
of this crap. maybe you will just never know. and truly i am sorry for you. and you might think that you
are old and you know everything but until you feel it you won't understand. and until you do. you as a
human being should not be writing all of this. you are corrupting your own mind.
Nevada, United States
[433]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I don't think you actually read the article, or at least you read very little, otherwise you would have
understood the issues that were presented.
The authors of the article and the book from which it was taken, are Jerald and Sandra Tanner whose
credentials are much more extensive than you realize. You can visit their website and consider the
issues for yourself at:
www.utlm.org
You can also send them an e-mail at:
Editor@utlm.org
There are many articles regarding Mormon issues on the On Doctrine website at:
MORMONS
There are many resources on the On Doctrine website, so please come back again for a visit.
SEE THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION:
"The Testimonies by the Witnesses to the Book of Mormon are Unreliable, Contradictory and
Deceiving"
#25A
Had a quick scan of your site, sorry but i didn't see much to write home about. This sort of web site
only seem to exist in USA, I wonder why?
Praise God Christianity is bigger than America.
Auckland, New Zealand
[455]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Thank you for your visit and message on the Contact page.
I appreciate your visit, but I don't think you really did a very good job of reviewing the content on the
website. You need to come back again for a visit and check all of the links to the various sections
before you come to a conclusion. I believe that you reviewed only one minor section. See the home
page at:
www.ondoctrine.com
I think your political views are clouding your religious views, so I would check the apologetics websites
located in New Zealand, which you do not seem to believe actually exist. Here are just a few that are
major players on the Internet:
Christian Witness Ministries
www.christian-witness.org
Wellington Christian Apologetics Society
www.christian-apologetics.org
MacGregor Ministries
www.macgregorministries.org
Moriel
www.moriel.org
#25B
I'm sorry but I do believe the views of your site are extrememly narrow
minded, all you seem to do is attack other christian ministries.
Auckland, New Zealand
[457]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Like I tried to tell you previously that you have made a judgment without reviewing everthing on the
website. You are quick to judge without
actually doing the research, just as you are quick to accept your teachers
without dealing with the issues in relation to the Scripture. That is your great loss.
#26
I found your article on Carlton Pearson enlightening. However I am not convinced that Jesse Duplantis
should be aligned with Pearson in terms of the redemptive work of Christ. Jesse Duplantis never said
nor implied in his trip to heaven that people were there who did not believe in Jesus as Lord and
Savior. Nor did he implicate Christ work as insufficent. I saw the DVD, read the book, and listened to
the tape. Jesse's view was that those who are saved are saved completely. This through the sufficient
work of Christ. No one there was seperated from God or sentenced to hell and had to work to receive
a get out of hell free card. Christ himself alludes to a ranking in heaven when he speaks about his
cousin John the Baptist. He says even the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John the
Baptist. Now if there is a least in the kingdom there must be some sort of ranking system amoung those
who are SAVED. Christ also says that He will reward those who are SAVED. Hence, the Book of
Work
God taught us everything we know but He did not teach us everything He knows. Your are not an
expert on the things of God and niether am I. Instead of talking about God's creation, your brothers
and sisters, why not pray for them. Especially those who you claim are not teaching the "correct" word
of God. Pray for me, too.
Sincerely,
Slow to Speak, Quick to Listen, Slow to Anger
[434]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
The issue in relation to the dream of Jesse Duplantis is the fact that it is presented as a direct revelation,
not only of actual events but of descriptions of the character and nature of God and Jesus Christ, and
the spiritual condition and relationship of believers to God while in heaven.
Basic to those issues is the core foundational issue of continuing revelation. If you believe in continuing
revelation from God, then there are no grounds to deny what Jesse Duplantis said and the incident that
he described must be accepted as reality along with the ultimate end to which his revelation takes you in
relation to the Scripture. The definition of a revelation is that which was not known before, so if Jesse
Duplantis presents information that was not previously known or it is different than what was previously
known through the Scripture, then the Scripture cannot be used to judge the new revelation because it
is something that is not subject to scrutiny by definition. That is the position taken be virtually every
modern-day revelator, because they claim that God specifically told them, therefore no one can
contradict what they say. It is a position of convenience which relieves them of any responsibility to
reconcile what they say to the Scripture. However, if Jesse Duplantis actually received a revelation from
God, then it must be added to the Bible as Scripture because it reveals something not previously stated
in the Scripture, and each succeeding revelation by him must also be included as a book of the Gospel
of Jesse Duplantis. The same must be done in relation to the other uncounted thousands of people who
claim direct revelation from God on a daily basis. Revelation from God in one instance is no different
from revelation in another, and the words of God, Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit received by Jesse
Duplantis are no less authoritative or important than those already a part of Scripture, if in fact he did
receive a revelation.
If a person wishes to deny a revelation from Jesse Duplantis under those circumstances, then the only
grounds are the reliability or motives of the revelator, especially in relation to his credentials. That is one
of the specific issues in relation to Jesse Duplantis, because he has no credentials authenticating his
claims as a prophet and revelator other than the fact that he says he received a revelation, which any
person can claim. If you take Jesse Duplantis at his word regarding his revelation, without any
confirming credentials, then you must accept any claimed revelation from any other individual on the
same basis, regardless of whether they contradict any other revelation given by another individual. That
is a problem.
I do not accept a belief in continuing direct revelation and I do not accept a person just because they
make a statement claiming a direct revelation. As a result, I have no difficulty asserting that Jesse
Duplantis must be subject to the authority and scrutiny of the Scripture rather than his revelation
subjecting the Scripture to his claims. If the Scripture and the claims of Jesse Duplantis are found to be
different, then a decision must be made as to who is the final authority. If, at that point, Jesse Duplantis
becomes your authority, then your spiritual future is dependant solely on whatever pronouncement he
may make, regardless of what you may find in the Scripture.
The question is not about what Jesse Duplantis did not say in relation to other subjects, such as
salvation, but what he did say in relation to what he claimed to see, hear and experience as compared
to the Scripture.
The subject of rewards in heaven has nothing to do with a person's acceptability to God or their
appearance before Him.
1. The Scripture says that a person draws near to God as a result of a clean heart, James 4:8, but Jesse
Duplantis says that it is a result of smelling leaves.
2. The Scripture says to draw near to the throne of God with confidence in this life, not just in the next,
Hebrews 4:16, but Jesse Duplantis says there are those who cannot come near to God without smelling
leaves. Where are the leaves that Christians must smell in this life in order to draw near to the throne of
God?
3. The Scripture says that Christians draw near to the throne of God because of the work of Jesus
Christ as our High Priest, Hebrews 4:16, but in Jesse Duplantis' revelation, the work of Jesus Christ is
not sufficient, so some Christians must smell leaves, apart from Jesus Christ, in order to draw near.
4. The Scripture says that Christians have confident access to God by exercising faith in Jesus Christ,
Ephesians 3:12, but in Jesse Duplantis' revelation, Jesus Christ is not part of the process which has
been taken over by the effects that the odor of some leaves have on individuals.
5. The Scripture says that those who were once far away and those who were near, have access to
God in one Spirit, Ephesians 2:18, but in Jesse Duplantis' revelation, there are also two groups; those
who are near and those who are far away from the throne of God, and those who are near come to
God by their qualifying works, while those who are far away come near, not through the Spirit or by the
work of Jesus Christ, but through smelling leaves.
Where is this cut-off point where Christians are separated into two groups; one group who can
approach God and one group who cannot? What are the criteria for such a division and how can a
person know whether they are qualified or unqualified? But the real question is, where is this teaching
found in the Scripture, not only in relation two the two groups but in relation to smelling leaves in order
to obtain some type of spiritual exaltation? If you accept Jesse Duplantis as a revelator, then you have
no need to confirm his teachings in the Scripture, because you have made him your Spiritual authority
as a substitute for Scripture. Since nothing in Jesse Duplantis' dream is found in the Scripture, I will
remain with the Scripture.
#27
Are you sold bold to speak on the lords servant in such a way?
[455]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
To which servant are you referring and, based on the Scripture, why don't you provide a defense for
that individual against what I said? Are the issues not important to you?
#28
I just want to commit on some of the things that I have seen on your website. The bible says touch not
my annointed and do my prophet no harm. I think that you may be treading thin ice when you attack
the men and women of God in the way that you have on this website. I feel if you have this much issue
with the teachings that is coming forth from these men and women of God, that you should pray without
ceasing. This type of attack does nothing for the body of Christ, nor does it benefit the souls who need
to be saved. If you have this much time to do this much research into what this many men and women
of God are saying and doing, then in my opinion you have too much free time on your hands that you
can devote to spending time before the face of God. I have yet heard you comment on the lives that
have been changed and the souls saved through the ministries of the people that you are attacking so
strongly. Isn't that what really matters. That peoples souls are being kept from a burning hell an [message cut-off during transmission]
Maryland, United States
[480]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I have attached your message, because part of it was cut-off during transmission, so I do not know
what your final comments might have been.
I have dealt with most of the points that you raise in an article in the FAQS section:
"Why Do I Criticize God's Anointed?"
I have presented certain issues in relation to the individuals that I have discussed on the website that
relate either to their conduct or teachings in relation to the Scripture. If the issues are valid, then they
must be dealt with. If they are not valid, then a defense can be made from the Scripture in order to
support them. Apparently you do not believe that what a teacher says or does makes any difference,
and that truth or fidelity to the Scriptural doctrines and mandates is of no importance. I take exception
to
that as does the Scripture.
False doctrine, immoral and illegal conduct is fast becoming the norm of leadership in the Christian
church today, but I fail to see that God is so helpless that he exonerates and accepts that standard from
those who present no credentials to back their claim of special privilege before Him. God is quite
capable
of bringing the gospel message to any individual that he so chooses, and He does not require the
services of any particular individual no matter how anointed they may claim to be.
#29A
Dear Gary, why is it, that King David is not in your hall of shame, also
concerning jimmy swaggart, there's a big difference between him and the rest of the hall of
shame.
Lastly, John Mac arthur has more of a doctrine problem that jimmy swaggart.
Northern Ireland
[481]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I am asked the question about King David quite often. The answer is that he has been in the Scriptural
Hall of Shame for thousands of years and his story is treated much better there than I could ever do on
the website.
I know John MacArthur is considered to be a controversial figure to many, so I would be interested to
know which doctrines are an issue in relation to him.
The problem with Jimmy Swaggart is the fact that his conduct disqualifies him from a position as a
pastor, elder or teacher, but he has not conformed to the Scriptural mandate in that regard, so he is in
violation on two fronts, his initial sin resulting in disqualification and his refusal to submit to the Scripture,
1 Timothy 3:1-3, Titus 1:5-9.
#29B
Dear Gary, saint Peter cursed his Lord, but yet on the day of pentecost preached the Gospel and not
only this cut off a certain person's ear, again his Lord told him to feed the sheep, there is no difference
between him and jimmy swaggart.
Northern Ireland
[489]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
You are missing the point. The issue is not a comparison of preachers to other individuals, but a
comparison of their conduct and teaching to the standards presented in the Scripture that either
confirms or denies their position. That is why 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9 exist. The question is,
Where does the authority lie, with the teacher or with the Scripture?
#30A
IS Gary Hand a christian?
Arizona, United States
[493]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
The answer is, yes. Why do you ask?
#30B
Because Mr. Hand waS SAYING how Benny Hinn is a false prophet. His miracles and
what he teaches seems ligitimate to the bible...? Right. He doesn't decieve any.
Arizona, United States
[498]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I think that it is important that you understand that just because a person disagrees with another
individual, it does not mean that the person is not a Christian. There are many leaders in the Christian
community who are teaching that if a person disagrees with them, they are considered to be disagreeing
with God, or that if a person opposes their ministry the person is opposing the work of God. That is not
necessarily a proper conclusion. In the case of Benny Hinn, my opposition is based on what the
Scripture says in relation to what Benny Hinn has said and claimed.
Benny Hinn claims to be a prophet, a person who can foretell the future based on information that he
says has come directly from God by means of the Holy Spirit. If what Benny Hinn claims about himself
is true, then his prophecies should all come true and if they do not, then he is considered to be a false
prophet by the specific words of God stated in Deuteronomy 18:20-22. In the case of a prophet, God
has spoken the standard to be applied and if the prophet does not conform to the standard then he is
not approved by God and is not a prophet.
The issue is pretty clear. If Benny Hinn's prophecies ALL COME TRUE, then I have no problem with
accepting that he is a prophet, however, if ANY of his prophecies DO NOT COME TRUE, then I will
specifically state that he is a false and deceiving prophet according to the Scripture. If Benny Hinn's
prophecies do not come true, then he has made God and the Holy Spirit to be liars about those
prophecies, because he claims to have received the information directly from Them.
If you did not read the article about Benny Hinn on the On Doctrine website, (here is the link to the
article) . . . [ Benny Hinn ] . . . that list(s) a few of the prophecies that
Benny Hinn has made and you can decide for yourself if any of them have come true.
#30C
Yea, i guess you;re just putting your take on Mr. HInn. I guess we all have to test the spirits, but
prophets may not hear right all the time, and we should have sympathy on them right? I know i am not
perfect and i can say some imperfect things. But, some of his prophecies come true though right? He
heals many. I really do feel he is genuine. I feel people are really healed who come up on the stage with
him at the crusades. I don't think he has some pre-selected poeple to go up and pretend they are
healed. That would be exceedingly deceitfull to promote himself. He would probably understasnd what
he is doing and stop or he wouldn't be truly following Jesus correct? I know we have to judge prophets
by their fruits. So you're right though about that. God bless.
Arizona, United States
[503]
#31
Re: faq013
I HAVE NO OBJECTIONS OF CORRECTIONS ON A PERSONS TEACHING IF DONE AS
THE SCRIPTURES TEACH... IN LOVE AND WITH THREE SCRIPTURAL
REFERANCES.
EXCLUDE PERSONAL COMMENTS,AND MOST DEFENECTLY
MOCKERY. IT'S THE GOODNESS OF "God" that brings man to
repentence. we should keep in mind that we are bringing people to CHRIST not trying to chase them
away.
I HOPE THIS MESSAGE ACCOMLISHES GOD NOT HARM.
Wisconsin, United States
[499]
#32
I accidently stumbled onto your website. How sad to see men who act like they know the scripture,
while tearing a preacher down. What a shame!
You would think that you would be "Walking in Love" as Jesus commands, instead of wasting your
time critisizing!
How do you know how God does or does not talk to someone else. Or what an angel of God would
say to someone, were you there?
All preachers preach differently, to reach different people.
I've personally heard Jesse and listened to his preachings on cd. He preaches with a sense of humor,
which is wonderful. Don't you think God has a sense of humor, where do you think Jesse received it
from.
I listen to Ken Copeland, Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyer, John Hagee,
Kenneth Hagin etc., all of whom preach the word.
If I was you, I'd be careful about ripping up men of God!!!!!
Virginia, United States
[507]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
SEE:
JESSE DUPLANTIS
KENNETH COPELAND
"Kenneth Copeland - What Did He Say?"
Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Mark 11:12-23 and False
Prophecies"
#33
Thank you for your reply -- but this kind of narrow minded, mean spirited 'Christians' is what is and has
caused MANY WARS - Why can't you base your 'religion' on LOVE, COMPASSION,
UNDERSTANDING and NOT the horrible condemnations!! Apparently we have a different God for
those of us who DO base our spirituality on God's LOVE!
YOU MUST hold your 'customers' through FEAR and not God's LOVE!! I HONOR, PRAISE AND
BLESS CARLTON PEARSON for having the courage to reach out and stepping OUT OF THAT
fear based religion.
That being said, I DO appreciate your giving me an Email address for him.
Needless to say, don't include me on any kind of mailing list.
North Carolina, United States
[550]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
SEE THE ARTICLE: The Gospel of Inclusion and Carlton
Pearson
#34
I wanted to bring up a point of clarification about a statement you made regarding Word of Faith
ministries. You stated: "Money is the goal and heart of virtually every Word of Faith "ministry". I
attend a non-denominational church that identifies itself with the Word of Faith "label" so to speak.
Now I didn't know anything about this prior to attending this church so it is entirely possible that my
church teaches something different than the original teachings established. However, I have listened to
many teachings from Kenneth Copeland and what I have heard has not contradicted what I've learned
in church. Specifically, speaking words of faith has nothing to do with faith being more powerful than
God. God is not our genie to be at our beck and call and do whatever we ask. What God does do is
honor his Word. If we speak His Word (the Bible), his Word will not return void and will come to
pass. That doesn't mean instantly or even within a year. It means that as we continually (not just once
or twic
It is entirely possible that in the early stages the Word of Faith movement had some "kooky" (as my
pastor would put it) teachings or that earnest teachings were misused, misunderstood, or
misinterpreted. However, the teachers and pastors that I hear today that acknowledge an affiliation or
inspiration from that movement do not teach that whatever we ask we shall receive. They teach that
when we ask according to His Word we shall receive in His time.
Virginia, United States
[558]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
My point in relation to the major players in the Word of Faith Community (Copeland, Duplantis,
Roberts, etc.) is that they teach that faith is an entity that has power within itself that causes God to act.
In other words God is coerced by faith, and that faith can be obtained, not by giving yourself or your
time or your efforts to others but by singly giving money,
(Seed Faith & Giving and Receiving). In other
words, faith can be purchased and it is purchased by giving money to a ministry and faith will bring
miracles into your life. That is the very issue dealt with by Peter in relation to Simon the sorcerer in Acts
8:4-24. Faith is not an entity that can be purchased and it is not something that you can manufacture
within yourself - it is a gift from God.
You should become aware of what Kenneth Copeland is teaching, not just in relation to faith, but in
relation to other doctrines as well. I suggest you read two articles on the On Doctrine website:
Kenneth Copeland - What Did He Say?
Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Mark 11:12-23 and False
Prophecies
#35A
I briefly scanned your criticisms of Kenneth Copeland Ministries. . .I find this to be intriguing that
Christians would spend so much time, working so hard, explaining their interpretation of a Christian
brother's words. . .I am a true believer in Jesus Christ and have received K Copeland, as well as other
faith teachers' in a positive light. It appears to me that your judgmental attitude is a result of jealousy or
possibly that you can't fathom our Father as a good God, but rather as a mean God. . .I have been
saved for over 30 years, in various denominations, have done individual studies as well as my own
personal relationship with Jesus. . .Finally, several years ago, I began to see God as He is, and to
receive His Love for me. . . It's because of people like K Copeland that I finally have joy and life, and
because of teaching by people like you that I formerly walked in fear and depression, never realizing
how much God loves me.
[590]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I believe that you should take a little more time to understand what the Bible says as opposed to what
Kenneth Copeland is saying, because you have not dealt with the issues in relation to his words. I don't
have to "interpret" anything that Kenneth Copeland says, since his words say exactly what he means,
which is why they are quoted and footnoted.
If you wish to see a man in a positive light who claims to receive revelations from God that do not come
true, then you must deal with why that is acceptable to you.
SEE THE ARTICLES:
Kenneth Copeland
Kenneth Copeland - What Did He Say?
Kenneth Coeland, Kenneth Hagin, Mark 11:12-23 and False
Prophecies
#35B
I appreciate your reply and concern for others' beliefs. If you feel you are doing a service to believers
throughout the Body of Christ, more power to you (God's power, that is!).
thanks again for your reply.
A sister in Christ,.
[625]
#36
Rev. Hand
OUCH! It must hurt to be so bitter and jealous. I hope God will reveal Himself to you in a way that
makes you feel special so you don't have to try and tear everyone else's ministries apart! God Bless
You!
Kentucky, United States
[631]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Apparently you have found something in an area of the On Doctrine website that has disturbed you.
The doctrines and conduct of the individuals presented are compared to that which is stated to be
acceptable in the Bible and the extent to which they deviate from the biblical standards reveals the
problem.
I am not a Reverend, have no church, followers or organization, On Doctrine is not a ministry, does
not solicit or accept donations or support, and I have not aspired to the ministry so I have no axe to
grind on a professional level and have no particular reason to be bitter or jealous toward the individuals
and ministries which are considered on the On Doctrine website. I know that a number of the
individuals discussed on the On Doctrine website teach that people who disagree with them are bitter
or jealous, but that is simply their attempt to avoid responsibility and accountability in relation to their
doctrines and conduct. No one is exempt from scrutiny by the Scripture.
You have chosen to ignore the issues raised and instead attacked my character in an attempt to
convince yourself that those issues do not exist or have no merit. What I may or may not be as a person
or what you erroneously believe are my motives, do not change the issues, because the issues either
have merit or they do not. If they have merit, then you need to deal with them. If they do not have
merit, then you can present a defense based on the Scripture, which you have not bothered to do. An
emotional response from you with no specific content and no examples of your disagreements is of no
value to me. If you wish to consider the issues in relation to the individuals that concern you and present
a defense of what has been said about them from a biblical foundation, then I will be happy to consider
your presentation.
#37A
Benny Hinn
I would like to receive more teachings on Evangelism and Mission Work as i have the calling of an
Evangelist over my life and i am currently involved in the [ministry name
removed -ed.].
Cape Town, South Africa
[649]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Welcome to On doctrine.
Thank you for your message on the CONTACT page.
Please note that all messages sent on the Contact page are received by On Doctrine only.
On Doctrine does not forward messages without prior consent of the recipient.
On Doctrine is not associated with Benny Hinn in any manner, the reasons for which can be found on
the page from which you selected the Contact page at:
www.ondoctrine.com/10hinn.htm
You can send your message directly to Benny Hinn at his e-mail address at:
InfoRequest@imail.bennyhinn.org
There are many resources on the On Doctrine website, so please come back again for a visit.
Sincerely,
#37B
PLEASE REMOVE MY E-MAIL ADDRESS FROM YOUR MAILING LIST: I NEVER SIGNED
UP TO RECEIVE MAIL FROM YOU AND I DO NOT NEED YOUR FALSE DOCTRINE IN
MY MAIL. I MAILED BENNY HINN BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT HE IS A MAN OF GOD IF
YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT, I DID NOT ASK FOR YOUR OPINION.
Thank you
Cape Town, South Africa
[683]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
You're welcome! It is so nice to know that you appreciated the fact that I took the time to explain to
you that you sent a message to the wrong person and that I provided the correct e-mail address so you
could contact Benny Hinn. I appreciate your kind consideration of the fact that I did not simply place
your message in the trash so you would never know that your message did not reach Benny
Hinn.
I know that you diligently read every word on the page in the link about Benny Hinn that I noted, and
that is the reason you say that I have presented false doctrine. That page was the original page from
which you selected the link to the On Doctrine CONTACT page thinking that you were sending a
message to Benny Hinn. Unfortunately, you did not read the page at that time or you would have
realized your mistake and you did not read it this time either, or you would have noticed the 4 false
prophecies that Benny Hinn gave. But, I guess God doesn't really care about a few false prophecies
here and there, Deuteronomy 18:20-22. Perhaps you could list or explain the false doctrines that you
claim that I present, and also present the biblical foundation for your disagreement? Just a
thought.
On Doctrine does not maintain a mailing list.
Sincerely,
#38
Creator of dictionary
To Whom It May Concern:
While I appreciate your zeal to see souls saved for the Lord, and there is a great deal of useful,
accurate information in your dictionary, I must point out one thing. Lutherans do not believe in
consubstantiation. Any Lutheran who understands the term and its implications will tell you this.
Lutherans believe in the Real Presence.
Michigan, United States
[665]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Welcome to On Doctrine,—.
Thank you for your visit and message on the Contact page.
While Lutherans prefer to use the term "Real Presence" in relation to the Lord's Supper, that term is
used because of a desire to remove the connotation that the term consubstantiation may invoke in
relation to other uses of a similar term that implies a unity or sameness, which is really only a semantical
differentiation. An example is the term consubstantial, when used in relation to God and Jesus Christ,
which means one in essence or being. However, even that term does not designate God and Jesus
Christ as the same individual. The misunderstanding of the word consubstantiation by the misapplication
of a connotation is a problem with the user or the hearer and not with the word itself. Even the term
Real Presence carries with it certain connotative ideas, which is why it requires an explanation just as
does virtually any term.
Consubstantiation, as it was presented and defined by Luther in relation to its true meaning as
co-existence of the body and blood along with the bread and wine, is in fact what is being stated as the
"Real Presence".
The current definition of consubstantiation is as follows:
"The doctrine that the substance of the bread and wine of the Eucharist exists, after consecration, side
by side with the substance of the body and blood of Christ but is not changed into it."
---Webster's New World Dictionary
"Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are
distributed to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise,"
---Augsburg Confession
The Augsburg Confession is even less precise in relation to the definition of how the bread and wine
relate to the body and blood than the dictionary definition.
If one understands the actual meaning of consubstantiation and does not apply some connotative
meaning not implied, then there is no conflict with the Real Presence. I will make a note in the On
Doctrine dictionary regarding term Real Presence.
I cannot accept the concept of consubstantiation or the Real Presence, because of the obvious conflict
with the point in time that Jesus Christ instituted the practice. If it is assumed that the actual body and
blood of Jesus Christ are present along side the bread and wine, then the same must have been the case
at the last supper. However, Lutheran's state that the Real Presence is the body and blood of the risen
Christ, which would not have been the case when it was instituted, since Jesus Christ had not yet given
His body or shed His blood and He had not yet died or risen from the dead. Jesus Christ was still in
possession of His body and blood, and to assume that His body and blood was present with the bread
and wine could only mean that some part of His body and a quantity of His blood was taken from His
being in order for the disciples to partake in a communion or the Real Presence, which would mean that
Jesus Christ offered His body and blood twice, once in order to institute the communion ordinance and
once for the atonement, and that the same happens every time a person partakes in communion. Since
Jesus Christ was already physically present with them, I find the idea to be inconsistent with reality. I
also find, that in a very real sense, consubstantiation and the Real Presence necessitates that the body of
Jesus Christ be given over and over again to be present at each instance of the communion, since the
act is a representation of His actual crucifixion, which means He is continually being crucified, a concept
which I cannot accept.
This is not a salvation issue, so we can agree to disagree on this particular point.
Sincerely in Christ,
#39
the person who wrote against richard roberts as a false prophet and healer
Dear Sir:
Greetings. I am a fellow minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I know that there are false prophets
and claims out there! But do you know why there are false prophets? Not just because Jesus said
there would be but also because there are real prophets who are of God! There cannot be false
prophets will being some real prophets! Satan always has a counterfeit for the real. One bad prophet
doesn't make every minister or prophet bad!!
Secondly you must not believe in miracles? Sir if I had the time I would take you through the old and
new testament and through out times and tell you of miracle after miracle. Time and space would not
allow me to do that. I know that there are preachers out there who do a lot of things that I do not
agree with, especailly money matters. There are some things that a few of them have been caught in
which has left a bad taste in the world's eyes!
But as far as Richard Roberts, I personally know that he is one of the most kindest and humblest men I
have ever met. And yes I know personally a few who have been healed in his ministry.
Dear sir. I respect you and well as any other person or minister. But there is one thing different from
me and you? Do you know what the bible calls Satan in the book of Revelation? Several things but
one in particlar. Satan is called the........"accuser of the brethren!" Look it up! You know why he is
called the "accuser of the brethren?" He goes around accusing God's people before God. And that
spirit has gotten
onto a lot of people including preachers and internet so-called theologians who think everyone else is
bad and wrong but them!
Please hear me out. thank you. Personally sir, I don't think that God has called you to get on the
internet and down ministers and evangelists and pastors, or teachers or prophets, or anyone, even if
you don't agree
with them or their ministries. God didnot tell you to do that. WHY?
Because anyone who critizes (like you) is not the .......the HOly
Spirit! That is the work of Satan to ........ACCUSE THE BRETHREN!!!
That is the work of the devil. Not God nor the Holy Spirit. You and others alike will stand before
God, and give an account of every idle word and judmental word that you have said about every
preacher or person.
I will not allow the devil to use my mouth to critizie ministers or people. I do respect you and your
work. But when it goes against God's Word and character, then I cannot accept it.
Do you not know dear sir, (I consider you a gentleman) that God's word talks about tearing down
someone character??? Why can't we just pray for those whom we think is wrong or not doing
right?
There is already so much destruction and negative talk, no wonder the world doesn't believe in God nor
that God can do anything any more???
Sir I am sorry but I have prayed and fasted many days, and I have seen real, actual healings in my
ministry and in my church. I do not claim to be a healer or prophet, just a pastor with God's heart and
love to his sheep. God has healed me, 5 times in my life!
Please consider what I have said. Even though some things that you have said may be true, that
doesn't give you a license or right as well as anyone else to gossip it around. That displease the Holy
Spirit. You can say that the HOly Spirit led you, but He doesn't contracdict the Word of God! The
Holy Spirit is a gentleman! I noticed that you named and critized all the great men and women who
have a healing ministry. Sir you do have a great problem........of fulfilling Satan's will and work.
Accusing the bretheren!!!
Dear sir, you have a nice day. And please pray for me and the others.
Alabama, United States
[666]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Welcome to On Doctrine.
Thank you for your visit and message on the On Doctrine Contact page.
I am not sure how you come to your conclusion in relation to false prophets. The fact that there are
false prophets does not indicate or validate as reality that true prophets are in existence. They could be
in existence, but the true prophets in the past are the models for the false prophets of the present. You
must consider that possibility. There certainly can be false prophets without the existence of true
prophets.
God Himself states the definition of a false prophet in Deuteronomy:
"'But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to
speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die. You may say in your heart,
"''How will we know that word which the Lord has not spoken?"" When a prophet speaks in the name
of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not
spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him,'"
Deuteronomy 18:20-22.
"'If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign
or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying, 'Let us go after other gods
(whom you have not known) and let us serve them,' you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or
that dreamer of dreams; for the Lord your God is testing you to find out if you love the Lord your God
with all your heart and with all your soul,"
Deuteronomy 13:1-3.
Whether or not a prophet is true or false is dependent on what he says in relation to saying what God
says and in relation to the fulfillment of prophecies that have been stated and not whether true prophets
exist. A false prophet does not necessarily speak false prophecies, because it is possible that his
prophecies come true, but he is false if he teaches worship of a God or Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit
that he defines differently from what is revealed in the Scripture.
There is no statement or implication in my article about Richard
Roberts, indicating that I do not believe in miracles. You have created and assigned to me a belief
to which I do not subscribe, so you are creating a scenario which is not true. Richard Roberts has done
the same thing, and if you were watching his television program on October 31, 2005, you would have
heard his comments in which he specifically referred to me by name, and in which he also created a
false scenario, claiming that I hold to certain beliefs that I do not. He stated:
"There's a guy on the Internet right now who's name is Gary Hand, who's ah, ah, been beating-up on
me on a regular basis. Because he doesn't believe in healing. Fact, I'm not sure he even knows
God."
Since the article that Richard Roberts referred to on my website had been posted for over three years
with no changes, it was a bit of a stretch to claim that I had been beating-up on him on a regular basis,
but that was just the start of his fabrications. Not only did Richard Roberts claim that I do not believe
what actually I do, he took it upon himself to place himself in the position of Jesus Christ in order to
judge the validity of my salvation. I have never judged Richard Roberts in relation to his claim of
salvation, which only Jesus Christ has the authority to do, so I find it very strange that a person who
claims first-hand knowledge directly from the mouth of God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit would
believe that he has that authority or knowledge.
"While there are people out there on the Internet who are preaching against me, because they don't
believe in healing, I know that you believe in healing. And I could care less what that idiot
thinks."
Apparently the prophet did not obtain his information about me from God since I do believe in healing
but not in the manner being promoted by Richard Roberts which is his real issue with me, because I
assert that what he claims does not represent the manner of healing in the Scripture.
"He reminds me of the religious leaders who put Jesus on the cross. This guy wouldn't know the Lord if
he met Him coming down the road, and he jumpin' on me for believin' on God to get people healed."
Richard Roberts placed himself in the position of a prognosticating judge, asserting that he knew that
had I been present in the time of Jesus Christ that I would have been one of those who would have
crucified Jesus Christ. That is an abominable statement to make on national television for a man who
claims prophetic revelation from God on virtually a daily basis and who is presenting himself as a model
for the students of the university of which he is the president.
For the second time he asserted that I am not a Christian and do not have salvation because he said
that I do not know Jesus Christ. Richard Roberts is no prophet and he knows virtually zero about the
validity of my salvation because God has never spoken to him on that subject and never will. Whether
or not a person knows God is not the prerogative of Richard Roberts to determine. Only God and
Jesus Christ and the Holy spirit know the reality of salvation in the life of an individual and only Jesus
Christ has the authority to judge a person and declare a person to be saved or damned, John
5:22.
The saddest commentary on Richard Roberts is the fact that he spoke in the name of Jesus Christ and
then proceeded to usurp the position of Jesus Christ by presuming that he had the right, ability,
knowledge and authority to determine the validity of a person's salvation, not based on the message of
the gospel, but solely on opposition to his particular claims regarding healing. I am unaware that the
gospel message contains a provision that agreement with Richard Roberts' claims about healing are a
necessary adjunct of the gospel message and to disagree with his assertions invalidates salvation. If
Richard Roberts or anyone else can point out such a provision in the Scripture, then I will stand
corrected.
In his television broadcast, Richard Roberts employed a trick used in debates to mislead the audience,
called a "Straw Man" argument, by which he fabricated and contrived false statements against his
opponent and then proceeded to argue against those statements instead of the substance of the issue.
The undiscerning listener would believe that he was eloquently expounding on the oracles of God
through brilliant use of argument against his opponent, but he was only creating a diversion of smoke by
arguing against his own false assertions so that the real issues could be ignored. I don't actually believe
that Richard Roberts even cares that either I or the On Doctrine website exists, but he simply used my
article as the convenient outline for his television program that night in order to give the impression that
he was being a martyr for his particular belief.
In light of Richard Roberts' false statements about my beliefs that he made publicly, it is interesting that
you use Revelation 12:10 as a criticism of me. At least I have attempted to evaluate Oral and Richard
Roberts using a biblical standard while Richard Roberts simply vented his personal dislike because I
disagree with him, and in the process fabricated a claim about what he said were my beliefs. The root
word for Devil (Revelation 12:9 ff) is the Greek word diabolos, meaning accuser, slanderer or liar. His
conduct is seen in relation to Job (Job 1:6-11; 2:1-5) where God says that Job was righteous but Satan
said he was not, and by implication Satan called God a liar. In relation to Revelation 12:10, Satan
accuses the brethren of being unworthy for salvation even though their sins were covered by means of
the atonement, so Satan is calling both God and Jesus Christ liars and uses a lie himself. As I mentioned
before, I have not questioned Richard Roberts' salvation, so I do not stand as his accuser in place of
the Devil according to Revelation 12:10. But Richard Roberts' statements contain accusations against
me stating that I do not have salvation, that I do not know God and that I do not know Jesus Christ.
You first must deal with the man who accuses according to the example found in Revelation 12:10
before you attempt to apply the verse to me.
The issue in relation to how Richard Roberts claims that healings occur in his ministry, is whether or not
those claims correlate with how healings occurred in the Scripture, and there is no correlation
whatsoever. Prophets, apostles and Jesus Christ healed in every situation in which they found
themselves including on the streets, in urban gatherings, in homes, in the wilderness, in the temple and in
a gardens in the middle of the night, and they healed with a word and by a touch, but Richard Roberts
cannot do that. Jesus Christ healed everyone, and very few of those people that were healed believed
that He was the Messiah, yet they were all healed without the expression of the magical "Seed Faith"
necessary in Richard Roberts' healings. The biblical model did not restrict the healers to a prayer tower
or a television studio or the platform of a healing service. Richard Roberts is unable to perform his
mediatorial healing gift outside the parameters that he sets within his ministry. He cannot go outside on
the streets and heal everyone with a touch or go into hospitals and heal with a word, and he cannot
even heal everyone in one of his meetings, whether it be in person or on television. He does not follow
the biblical pattern in relation to how a healing occurs or how it is verified. Not one Scriptural healing
occurred when the healer simply stated that there were "X" number of healings available at that time and
if a person was healed of the disease specified that they were to come forward and make the claim that
they were healed. Richard Roberts does exactly that, such as claiming that God has at least "16"
healings available and people are to call or come forward if they have received that particular healing.
His pattern of healing is not the biblical pattern, and it is used by Richard Roberts in order to cover the
fact that he does not have the ability to heal by means of the biblical pattern. He uses that method to
cover the fact that not all of the "16" healings may not be effective, because 16 people do not always
call stating they have been healed. Richard Roberts can then claim that not all "16" healings were used,
because although they were available for certain individuals, those people did not take advantage of the
opportunity because they did not have faith, did not give their money as a "Seed Faith" offering or they
had fear or doubt in their lives, so God could not heal them. Richard Roberts can then slip out of the net
of responsibility for a failure to heal and then blame the problem on those who are sick and ultimately
on God who did not perform the healing. Then, there is the reality that people who call and say that
they are healed, may not actually be healed for real, perhaps not even being sick, and then Richard
Roberts can claim that he never said they were healed, because it was their claim and not his since God
never tells him the specific names of the people who are supposed to be healed, and then there is
always the excuse that Satan can steal a healing so that the effects of the disease still remain, so the
person has to have faith to keep their healing in addition to being healed, also a non-biblical pattern.
That is so far from the biblical standard that it is simply unbelievable to me that anyone would fall for
such a sham. You need to stand back and access the realities of what are being claimed and subject
those claims to the Scripture and not to the personality of Richard Roberts.
It is unnecessary to tell me that God has not spoken to me because I have never said or implied that He
has. I have never claimed the position of a pastor, deacon, elder, prophet, apostle or evangelist and
have never made any statement that I believe God has called me to post the On Doctrine website on
the Internet. God has never spoken audibly to me on any subject and I do not presume or expect that
He ever will, so nothing that I have stated or posted is to be presumed to have come from any
statement from God in the manner of a direct command or revelatory understanding directed
specifically to me from the heavenlies. I do not claim to have ever seen a vision, had revelatory dreams
or taken magical journeys to hell or heaven. I have never claimed to have seen God, Jesus Christ, the
Holy Spirit, angels or any other person mentioned in the Scripture.
On Doctrine is not a ministry, which I have stated on the On Doctrine About page at:
www.ondoctrine.com/00about.htm
On Doctrine is an informational resource and is not a ministry, church, organization, society or
association and does not have followers of any kind. On Doctrine does not solicit or accept funding of
any type for the operational expenses of the website or for personal remuneration, and is not supported
by any group, church or ministry or individual, with the exception of myself. I do not profess to have
any special "anointing" that places me in some exalted position where I can claim exclusion from
scrutiny or criticism because I pervert 1 Chronicles 16:22 by stating that no one is to "touch" me
because I am one of "God's anointed".
There is no difference between your claim of what I am doing to Richard Roberts and what you are
doing to me, because you judge me also based on what you claim that I do not believe, and you do not
seem to see the contradiction. If judgment by your definition is forbidden to me, it is also forbidden to
you. I understand your desire to defend Richard Roberts because you see him as representing what you
believe, but he also adopts the same contradiction in the attempt to eliminate any critical evaluation of
his doctrines and conduct, so that contradiction is apparently acceptable to you.
My concern in relation to your note is concentrated in three areas.
First, that you presume that I do not believe certain things that I do, namely that I do not believe in
miracles and that I do not believe in healing, and the foundation of your comments is predicated on
those assumptions. I do not deny miracles and I do not deny healing, but assert that God does as He
pleases at any time that he pleases and in any manner that He pleases. The miracle healing power of
God is not restricted by any individual or any other spiritual power, and also God is not coerced by any
individual or spiritual power because God heals and does not heal according to His sovereign plan and
for His glory, not according to what might be our desire or what we might believe to be right or
convenient. If you have been miraculously healed by God, then give Him the glory and your
congregation should do the same.
Secondly, as you must know, the majority of all Christians are not healed of all their diseases which
contradicts the claims of massive healings throughout the world by the major healing ministries which
you seem to accept without question simply because the leader has made the claim. Bringing the issue
down to practical considerations, I always ask, Why the healings claimed by the great healing ministries
are of the invisible type, but do not include the profoundly visible effects of disease, such as missing
legs, and arms being restored on TV, fingers eroded by leprosy instantly made whole, missing eyes as a
result of cancer appearing in their sockets and quadriplegics instantly having their spinal cords restored
and atrophied legs and arms instantly restored to normal size and function? There are other horribly
disfiguring diseases too numerous to mention here, but why is there not one example of a healing of that
type? Another question is, Why is it that infants and small children, who do not understand fear or
unbelief, and are in the last stages of cancer or some other disease, are not also healed?
Invariably the healing ministries claim that it is the fault of the person that they are not healed, because
they have fear or unbelief. But the real problem is, Why do the persons who have the most profoundly
visible diseases have the most fear or unbelief in their lives so that they are the one group that is never
healed? Is God selective in relation to the people that He heals, specifically ignoring those who have the
most deplorable diseases while healing the more esthetically pleasing?
Thirdly, you seem to believe that appearances are more important than character, integrity or fidelity to
the Scriptural mandates, and that truth is something to be concealed if it negatively impacts leadership.
You appear to justify that by stating that the world rejects God because there is "so much destruction
and negative talk" in the church. However, you are ignoring the fact that the major criticism of the
church by the world is that Christians are hypocrites, because they do not live lives that are
compatible with the Scripture they claim to believe and they do not call their leaders to accountability
but allow them to continue in ministries even when gross legal and moral violations are exposed. That
was the major criticism in relation to the Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker disclosures, and now the
criticism centers around the Catholic church because it attempted, and succeeded for many years, to
cover-up the gross immorality of many of its priests in order to maintain an illusion that everything was
alright when it was not, "For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light
for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his
deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God," John 3:20-21.
The lives of Christians should be transparent in relation to moral conduct and doctrinal integrity, but
violations of those precepts are being increasingly hidden in relation to leaders and that action is now
becoming acceptable to followers as well. The world seems to know what the standards for a Christian
leader should be, but many Christians ignore the biblical imperatives and refuse to enforce the standards
because they love their leaders more than the words of God, even when they teach falsely and engage
in illegal or immoral activities.
You have adopted a very pernicious view of God when you state, "no wonder the world doesn't
believe in God nor that God can do anything any more???" That is the claim of virtually all of the high
profile
teachers on the TBN network and by Oral and Richard Roberts, and it demeans God by asserting that
there are powers greater than His over which He has no control, that are able to thwart His will and
purpose. God did quite well for an eternity before He created the heavenly hosts, including Lucifer and
before He brought into being from nothing this universe and human beings. Everything that exists is by
His command, by His word, by His thought and continues to exist solely at His good pleasure by His
power. Never assume that there are forces over which God has no control or can change the course of
His will or his plan or impinge upon or impede the timetable that He has established. A god who is
affected by forces outside of himself is not the God of the Bible and is another god, which the major
players in the Word of Faith community are telling people to serve. That is the initial pervasive error that
has made its way into the Christian church and it brings God to the level of human beings while at the
same time human beings exalt themselves to the level of God by asserting that they have some measure
of control over the actions of God and not only that, claim also to be gods themselves. God states the
case:
"Remember this, and be assured; recall it to mind, you transgressors. Remember the former things long
past, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end
from the beginning, and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, 'My purpose will
be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure'; calling a bird of prey from the east, the man
of My purposes from a far country. Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it,
surely I will do it. Listen to Me, you stubborn-minded, who are far from righteousness. I bring near My
righteousness, it is not far off; and My salvation will not delay. And I will grant salvation in Zion, and
My glory for Israel,"
Isaiah 46:8-13 (NAS).
"The Lord of hosts has sworn saying, 'Surely, Just as I have intended so it has happened, and just as I
have planned so it will stand, to break Assyria in My land, and I will trample him on My mountains.
Then his yoke will be removed from them and his burden removed from their shoulder. This is the plan
devised against the whole earth; and this is the hand that is stretched out against all the nations. For the
Lord of hosts has planned, and who can frustrate it? And as for His stretched-out hand, who can turn it
back?'"
Isaiah 14:24-27 (NAS).
Nothing is a surprise to God and there is nothing that happens in His creation that changes His
approach or diverts His purpose, because He created after determining the end from the beginning. The
beginning and the end of the universe are already determined and described in the Scripture, and yet
there are those who claim God can be frustrated, that He has no authority or legal right to act in the
earth apart from the agreement with some human being who has no power at all, and that God is
subject to some higher law which He cannot ignore. No judicial proceedings can be instituted against
God, because He states the case against anyone who presumes the authority to try:
"Behold, one will come up like a lion from the thicket of the Jordan to a perennially watered pasture; for
in an instant I will make them run away from it, and whoever is chosen I will appoint over it. For who is
like Me, and who will summon Me into court? And who then is the shepherd who can stand before
Me?" Jeremiah 50:44 (NAS).
And then there is the claim that God must delay the second coming of Jesus Christ if the church does
not give enough money, send out enough missionaries or build enough TV stations, but God has already
said that He acts at His good pleasure and not according to a timetable established by human beings,
and Jesus Christ said that God already knows the time of the second coming,
"But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father
alone," Matthew 24:36 (NAS).).
I respond to people when I receive e-mails regarding the article on Richard Roberts or questions about
the comments he made about me last year, because they are personal inquiries and I take responsibility
for what I write and for what is posted on the website. I am willing to correct errors of fact and willing
to consider and correct errors of doctrine and belief when shown to be in error from the Scripture. I
have not responded directly, by means of an article on the On Doctrine website, to Richard Roberts'
assertions made on his TV broadcast, because he has no authority over my life and I find no reason to
defend myself to him at this point, although he has seemingly found it necessary to provide a defense
against me, but he has required the use of false statements in order to support his case, which means he
lost the battle and the war at the same time.
The issues in relation to Richard and Oral Roberts are biblical issues and they exist quite apart from me.
What I may or may not be does not change the issues that I presented and if I went to heaven today,
those would still remain valid issues for consideration. Those issues are serious and fundamental to the
claims of authority that both men claim to possess, but the issue of healing is only one.
I will pray for you that you will do the will of God in your ministry and that your congregation respond
to the message of the Scripture.
Sincerely in Christ,
#40
What are Gary Hand's credentials when he references the scriptures in response to Ministers like
Benny Hinn, Ken Copeland, Jesse Duplantis sponsored by the Catholic program TBN. Are there any
Ministers that he can agree with.What is your opinion of the TBN programing.
thank you
New Jersey, United States
[667]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Welcome to On Doctrine, —.
Thank you for your visit and message on the Contact page.
I am not sure what credentials are required in relation to referencing Scripture. I think I have probably
answered your question on the About page at:
www.ondoctrine.com/00about.htm
I don't think that I would consider TBN to be Catholic, although I would characterize it to be
ecumenical and tolerant if not accepting of Catholic doctrine, however, TBN is not particularly
concerned with the elements of doctrine except in the cases where doctrine opposes the beliefs that are
the primary expression of the network and represented by the beliefs of Paul Crouch.
TBN programming primarily reflects the religious views of Paul Crouch which are embodied in the
Word of Faith (Word Faith) theology found in the current teachings of
Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, Creflo Dollar, Rod Parsley, Marilyn Hickey, Joyce Meyer, Frederick K.C. Price, Paula White, Juanita
Bynum, John Hagee and numerous other teachers on the network. The theology, which is the main
teaching presented throughout the world by the TBN network, represents some of the most serious and
pervasive heresies ever gathered into one place.
TBN does make allowances for other theological views, but they are quite few in number.
I watch Adrian Rogers, D. James Kennedy and Charles Stanley quite often. However, my primary
interest is not represented by TBN.
#41
Greetings in the name of Jesus Lord of Lords King of Kings Halleluija!
The good news is Jesus heals cancer through Oral Roberts. Oral doesn't heal Jesus does. I am living
proof that cancer can be removed like a cold by Jesus Christ of Nazereth. Jesus removed my cancer
and it has been confirmed by the Doctor that it has gone.
The good news is when you need a miracle if you believe or not Jesus died and rose from the dead on
the third day to set you free from the power of sickness death and disease.
The God of Light love and life. The good news is there is eternal life in Jesus or eternity away from God
in darkness with every one not saved by the blood of Jesus all those that believe Jesus is Lord Romans
10:9 shall be saved.
Wake up you people, Jesus loves you he died and shed his blood for you believe and recieve the free
gift it is all true.
Religion or doctrine is not what it is about forget religion there are too many Jesus is the son of God he
is alive you can't put him in a book or put him in history. He is alive he does heal he has healed me he
has healed my dad but healing is only the flesh unimportant that will go back to dust it is only temporary.
The mind and soul will not die they last eternal you choose if with God or in darkness for eternity
WAKE UP! Rise and be healed in the name of Jesus amen
North Yorkshire, United Kingdom
[672]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Welcome to On Doctrine.
Thank you for your visit and message on the On Doctrine Contact page.
I appreciate your testimony to your healing from cancer. Give glory to God who is the source of all
blessings.
I do have two questions for you to consider. If Oral Roberts does not have the ability to heal, then what
part did he play in your healing? As a Christian, you have the Holy Spirit in you who "intercedes for us
with groanings too deep for words," and knew more about your disease and has the ability to better
communicate with God in relation to your need than Oral Roberts, so I am wondering why He is absent
in relation to your healing while Oral Roberts is given the credit?
#42
Brothers ripping apart brothers. It really is the end times. Is there anyone out there teaching the truth?
Just don't like all the hatred among Christians. The disciples argued alot and Jesus rebuked them. I
think there are many Pharisee-like people out there. Clean on the outside and dirty on the inside. I
wonder what Our Father thinks about us bashing each other as if we are the judge. I dont appreciate
false teachers. I have had a few in my life, but I forgive and move on to get "the truth".
In Total Love
Illinois, United States
[692]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
If you believe that you have moved on from the error of false teachers to truth, then the On Doctrine
website is not for you, but there are many people out there who have not moved on because they love
the false doctrines that they are being taught by their false teachers or they don't realize that they are
being taught false doctrine. That is the issue on the website, not bashing.
If you have encountered false teachers, how did you make that determination, and once you did decide
that to be the case, was it unimportant to you that others continued to follow those false teachers? The
Scripture is the judge and the standard used in relation to the conduct and doctrines taught by the
individuals discussed on the On Doctrine website. Apparently calling individuals to biblical
accountability, for what they say and do, disturbs you. I am not sure why that is the case, but it is an
issue that you will have to deal with yourself.
#43
Good on you for your website champ. I think the world is already pretty much aware of our failings as
humans in the body of Christ. it's good to read some more mud & get people's attention on that rather
than on Jesus himself.
Sydney, Australia
[699]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
The On Doctrine website does not exist for the enlightenment of the world in relation to religious issues.
The website exists for the edification of Christians who are so undiscerning that they love their leaders
more than the Scripture and more than Jesus Christ and are willing to accept and place into positions of
spiritual authority those who are unqualified according to the specific qualifications in the Scripture,
because they love what those leaders teach, 2 Timothy 4:3-4.
The On Doctrine website is a little more comprehensive than just the Hall of Shame and the
Organizations sections. Come back again and take a look.
#44
Stop writing about what this person and this is not doing right.
Let God judge.
You forget the millions and billions who the gospel has reached thru the TBN ministry .
The lord is coming soon so let him be the judge instead look for ways to spread the gospel to the ends
of the world for then God will come to take us home.
[708]
#45A
I have never read so much mis- quoted tipe in all my life, may it is that it is lot spelling mistakes, so
much for this Ephesians 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of
the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Ephesians 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Ephesians 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Ephesians 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Ephesians 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.much of
what you have id devisive to say the lease
Queensland, Australia
[712]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I understand that you have found some area on the On Doctrine website with which you disagree. You
have not provided any indication of what the subject of your disagreement might be. If I have
misquoted an individual or the Scripture would you please specify what it might be and provide a
proper explanation? It is not helpful to be critical if you do not state the reason and provide examples.
#45B
Basically everything you claim about Kenneth Copeland is wrong or out of context, I have sat under
this man's of God's ministry for over 20 years and find him to very accurate on the Word.
P.s.
Who appoint you to as the Holy spirit police, I am sure God is big enough to police those who
represent him, it always how some members of the body of Christ think it's their job to run around
correcting people aren't we all pert of the same body with Jesus as the head. Do hands pick fault with
your feet, I don't think so. all of us will never agree on doctrine but we should agree on building the
church with Jesus as the head Peter got it right when pressed by who do you say that I am Matthew
16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. doctrine is
man's Endeavour to judge one another, I Know without a doubt brother Copeland believes this and this
is what we all need focus not on petty differences Satan love getting amongst Christians over petty stuff
i.e. doctrines house divided falls are we all part of the same body, none of Kenneth or Gloria's teaching
is outside of the Word both tell people to search the scriptures and they don't profess to have all the
answers. I suggest may be instead of being negative listen carefully yourself to what is being preached
then pray and ask the holy spirit if you need fresh revelation on things.
6 years ago I enrolled at Rhema bible training Centre under Kenneth E. Hagan and I can tell you some
what I had heard in church over the previous 25 plus years was man's interpretation of scripture whilst
three we were constantly challenged to check scripture concerning everything we taught brother Hagan
made a big issue about lining everything up with the word
Queensland, Australia
[717]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I have listed numerous statements and teachings by Kenneth Copeland, and to a lesser degree Kenneth
Hagin, in a few articles on the On Doctrine website, in which I claim that those statements and teachings
are not found in or supported in the Bible. You claim that everything that Kenneth Copeland teaches
and Kenneth Hagin taught is Bible-based. If that is the case, then it should be easy to provide the
biblical support for those teachings that I claim are not found in the Scripture.
The articles are listed below and I would be interested to know how I have taken statements out of
context, what context they should be placed in and what biblical support you can provide that would
invalidate what I have claimed about the teachings of Kenneth Copeland and Kenneth Hagin.
I would not expect you to deal with every item that I have listed, but choose any five and we can
discuss what you claim to be the biblical foundation.
Kenneth Copeland
www.ondoctrine.com/10copela.htm
Kenneth Copeland: What Did He Say?
www.ondoctrine.com/conversa/3word001.htm
Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Mark 11:12-23 and False Prophecies
www.ondoctrine.com/conversa/3word004.htm
#45C
Further to my response to yesterdays reply I have to ask do you purchase Brother Copeland's tapes
just to find fault. How is it that you are able quote tape number and side?
And there are going to be multiplied millions upon millions, there's going to be close to a billion people
that have been trapped in that religion, that over the next few months are gonna to come into the
kingdom of God. (Cheering) That's gonna happen, you watch and see what I'm telling you.
Because it's been ... I'm telling you Satan's fat is in the fire he pushed it over the line, and God has
moved, and for over a hundred years the United States has been an instrument of judgment in the hand
of God. That's one of the reasons we're blessed, amen? I'd like to get in there and walk around a
while but I don't have the time but I can tell you this, that thing has come to an end, its over, I'm talking
about Islam and every, all that stands for. That's over with. Now, God is making His move."
Kenneth Copeland, Word of Life Christian Center, Honolulu HI, Dedication
Celebration Service, Evening, Dec. 2, 2001
Brother Copeland is the first say we are judge prophecies and pray about them not cause divisions
"there's going to be close to a billion people that have been trapped in that religion, that over the next
few months" Brother Copeland, ok I accept the words next few months may seem a little misleading
but do you throw the baby out with the bath water? NO! It doesn't make him a false prophet. God
was speaking through flesh and even brother Copeland can get it wrong sometimes he is a man. He is
the first to admit it. Note that he used the word Religion Many Religious people think they are
Christians, but Christianity is not a religion, but a relationship with the Living God and His Son Jesus
This word "Religious" seems originally to have signified an oath or vow to the gods, or the obligation
also bondage of such an oath or a vow, which was held very sacred by the Romans.] You may like
know that there have been a great number Muslims come to Christ. I recently spoke with a person who
had been in Indonesia and he said they were experiencing revival there. Evolution is a religion, love of
money is a religion, as is anything that gets between man and God is a religion.
Who has the right a time limit on how long the fulfillment of a prophetic word has to be? Example
Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed;
it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. How long after this was it before Jesus showed
up on the scene? I believe around 4000 years
Also your comment about God not having a body. if God doesn't have a body, how then do we get
scripture such as Exodus 15:8 And with the blast of thy nostrils the waters were gathered together, the
floods stood upright as an heap, and the depths were congealed in the heart of the sea1 Samuel 5:11
So they sent and gathered together all the lords of the Philistines, and said, Send away the ark of the
God of Israel, and let it go again to his own place, that it slay us not, and our people: for there was a
deadly destruction throughout all the city; the hand of God was very heavy there. Also implies God has
a body.
In conclusion: Acts 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to
pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the
disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. Why were they called Christians? They operated
in the same anointing as the Christ, we are also called to be like Christ the word Christian could be said
Christ-people like Paul told us Romans 14:19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for
peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. Paul's instructions are clear, we are to build up one
another up not tear down no finger pointing.
I believe if you want to find fault, you will, are we all of the same Father same faith? Do you believe
Jesus died on the cross and shed his blood for "you" taking your unrighteousness in exchange for his
righteousness making you joint heir with Christ? Romans 8:15 for ye have not received the spirit
of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, "Daddy"
Father. Romans 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
Romans 8:17 and if children, then heirs; of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we
suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. Romans 8:29 for whom he did foreknow, he
also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among
many brethren. This makes us Jesus' kid brothers and sisters. So stop the family feud and get on with
adding to the God's family if you have differences with members of your earthly family do you jump
online and criticize them I hope not
Does the Spirit itself beareth witness with your spirit, that you are a child of God. So if Jesus is the
firstborn what does that make you? something 1000000th we of joint heirs when my kids were little a
disagreement might arise between them I made sure they understood what a divided house meant. "NO
FIGHTING" else you fight Dad
I apologize if I appear abrupt yesterday but I was in the middle of editing
a service video. But I would really like you pray about the things you have
on your web sight it isn't good witness to the unsaved it reminded me
Muslims in Baghdad blowing each other all the time, no unity
Queensland, Australia
[742]
#45D
I could easily prove all scriptures but the unction in my spirit is that I would be wasting my time as I
believe all you are interested in is petty doctrine not building the church as Jesus told us to do, reality is
aren't all Christians supposed to work at building the church. Christians waste so much time debating
doctrine where we would all be better if we focused on brining the unsaved in and leading them to the
cross showing them that Jesus loves them doctrine has divided the body of Christ long enough, just as
a point of interest I am a graduate of Kenneth E, Hagin's Bible Training centre and I tell you this both
these men, Copeland & Hagin both support and believe in each others ministry what your web is doing
is being very divisive, so I ask you to pray and seek the Holy Spirit about why you need to play Holy
Ghost police, and is it some special gifting God has given you?
P.S, these kinds of web sites are not a good witness to the unsaved
Queensland, Australia
[746]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Welcome back to On Doctrine.
Thank you for your answer.
I ask the same question in many of the articles on the website, "Who is the authority, the Scripture or
the teacher." You have made your choice and your authorities are your teachers and not the Scripture,
something that you need to admit to yourself. I have attempted to provide the biblical foundation
for my comments about the doctrines of your teachers on the website, but you have provided none in
relation to your criticism, and that is your loss not mine, 1 Peter 3:15. As always, I am willing to discuss
the issues at any future time.
I am not sure where you get the idea about a "Holy Ghost police" force. What would that be? If I am
advocating some type of theological police force, that you define as unacceptable, then it certainly
would not be headed by the Holy Spirit. That is not an idea that is part of the Scripture. I remember
Benny Hinn talking about a "Holy Ghost machine gun" which he would use to blow the heads off of
everyone he didn't like. How he would assume that the Holy Spirit would be part of his corrupt desires
is a mystery to me. How the Holy Spirit would be associated with either a police force or a machine
gun is quite inexplicable. I have never claimed that the Holy Spirit has directed me to post the On
Doctrine website on the Internet or that I have some type of gifting in relation to its content.
I have dealt with some of the issue of prophecies in relation to your comments in the article in
mentioned in my last reply:
Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Mark 11:12-23 and False Prophecies
www.ondoctrine.com/conversa/3word004.htm#prophecies
Apparently you believe that because a person is human and speaks a false prophecy, that they are not a
false prophet, because, "even brother Copeland can get it wrong sometimes he is a man." How is it that
a person who speaks false prophecies "sometimes" is not a false prophet? I am not sure how you justify
that approach in your mind, because you are not using the Scripture as your foundation. How is it that
"even" brother Copeland can make a mistake? Is that such a rare occurrence that it is
considered to be insignificant in relation to his prophetic and theological abilities?
My claim is that he has made numerous theological "mistakes" that his false prophecy
regarding Islam confirms. Deuteronomy 18:20-22 makes no exception for the "sometimes" false
prophecy, simply because a true prophet is validated by the veracity of what he prophecies. If a
prophet prophecies falsely then none of his prophecies or teaching can be trusted. That is the point that
God makes in Deuteronomy and is the reason that He called for the death of false prophets. In point of
fact, even if every prophecy that a person might make comes true, a person is still a false prophet if they
do not conform to other criteria stated by God as well, Deuteronomy 13:1-11. At some point, you must
face reality, because on December 2, Kenneth Copeland's Islam prophecy celebrated its 5th birthday -
60 months - and the numbers of months will continue to mount as time goes on. The realm of Islam is
larger than it was in 2001 and there are more Islamic converts in the United States today than there
were in 2001.
#46
The foolishness of theologians knows no end. Theology is an oxymoron.
New Jersey, United States
[739
#47
I think you really have to be careful of how talk about the men & women
Of God who have made mistakes in their lives cause nobody is perfect
If you read the BIBLE and see all the people that GOD used you will find
that none of them was perfect the only perfect one was JESUS THE CHRIST !!! What we need to do
is instead of critizing them we need to
pray for them and not be so judgement. He who is spiritual restores
the one who has been weak and have fallen.
JUST PRAY FOR THEM PLEASE
THEY ARE OUR BROTHER & SISTERS IN THE LORD
[747]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
You are arguing against the wrong issue. The issue presented on the On Doctrine website is not about
perfection, love, repentance or restoration. The issue is about obedience to the commands of Scripture
in relation to conduct on the part of leadership in the church, who ignore the biblical prohibitions against
their conduct and refuse to accept the consequences of that conduct. The issue is about undiscerning
Christians who believe that forgiveness equates to restoration back to leadership, which it may not.
When leaders fail the standards mandated in the Scripture in relation to their leadership positions, there
are consequences, and those consequences involve forfeiture of their leadership positions.
Those who fail at any level in the church should receive prayers and in the event they truly repent, they
should be restored to fellowship, Matthew 18:21-35. However, in the case of leaders, there is a very
big difference between being restored to fellowship and being restored to leadership. The Scripture
does not provide a means of restoration to leadership of those who violate the standards that qualify a
person for leadership. It is the action of human beings who return a person to their leadership position,
but that action is not viewed as legitimate by God. Many Christians love to create their own set of
standards in relation to leadership instead of following what is directly stated in the Scripture, because
they love their leaders more than the Scripture. If you have never read them, you can find those
standards in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-16.
#48
Where is your forgivness you speak so much about. Do you know these peoples personal relationship
with our God? Who are you to judge? Who are you to know whether or not these people have
repented? My God says if we ask for forgivness, he not only gives it , but forgets it. Was Peter
without sin? He denied Christ 3 times. I somehow believe he is in Heaven. You should follow your
own teaching. Isn't there something in the Word that you so fluently give that says ALL HAVE
SINNED AND FELL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD; Be careful of your own words. It seems
to me that you have taken God's job away from him, and you are trying to tell people what He meant.
WHO ARE YOU?? Did he die only for you?? Please remember, He sees the heart, not you. Do you
know if these people have repented?? NO, you are not GOD. I would challenge you to be more like
Christ and practice what he preached......FORGIVNESS. I personally thank him everyday for his
sacrifice so I can get forgivness, how about you?? Oh, I'm s [rest of message lost during
transmission]
[749]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
See #47 above.
SEE: "Why Do I Criticize God's Anointed? www.ondoctrine.com/faqs/0faqs013.htm
#49
I have to ask...On what authority do you base such charges that are being made here about these
people and how is it that you seem to have THE INSIGHT on Gods Word and everybody else is nuts
or of satan...hmmmm mighty curious to me. And you yourselves are sinning as defined by Gods Word
with your judging and condemning here. And what God is it you serve? One who offers nothing to His
people..offers no healing or prosperity or help in time of need or troubles? Funny my Bible includes
these things all over the place so i find it funny since you seem to be such all mighty authorities you
either overlook them or is it that Gods Word actually says God and His Son offer nothing to His
Chosen People. I think you all need to Pray Pray Pray and actually get filled with Gods Holy Spirit and
let It show you your errors...This is outrageous and i certainly Pray that those who visit here do not
believe this garbage.
In Prayer For Your Souls and Enlightenment.
Missouri, United States
[754]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Apparently you have found items on the On Doctrine website with which you disagree.
I would be happy to respond if you would provide the specifics of your disagreement and your biblical
foundation. That would be helpful.
Hmmmmm, funny that you don't seem to see the contradiction that is apparent in your note, because if it
is ok for you to criticize me, why is it not ok for me to criticize those who you are trying to defend?
#50
You have got to be kidding me. You are rediculous.
[770]
#51A
I am so glad that God appointed you the Spiritual Police Chief of our time.
How sad you life must be. And to live in such a perfect World that is you.
I am thankful that I have finally found the "one who is without sin"....so start casting those stones.
Texas, United States
[775]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I don't believe that I have ever claimed to be sinless, and if you would peruse the On Doctrine website
a little further you would see that the issue is not about sinless perfection. The issue is one of biblical
standards as applied to leadership in the church and has as its foundation 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus
1:5-16. If you have difficulty accepting the fact that leadership is accountable to the Scripture and that
there are consequences for improper behavior and false teaching on the part of leaders, then I suggest
you take the issue to the apostle Paul who wrote the standards under the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit.
You seem to have adopted a Spiritual Police Chief's role in relation to me which you have defined as
being unacceptable and you do not seem to realize the contradiction. If criticism by your definition is
forbidden to me, it is also forbidden to you.
Apparently you are attempting to find fault with my character, which you also define as being
unacceptable, and at the same time accepting the gross sins in the lives of the leaders that are discussed
on the website, and again, you do not seem to realize the contradiction. According to your approach, if
you are without sin, then I guess you could criticize me, but since you are not, then you should first look
to yourself before attempting to misuse John 8:7 in relation to me.
#51B
I stand by my statements.....if you used half the energy you use on
this site to actually bring people to the understanding of Christ's
love, then your fruits would be evident.
Enjoy your Pharasee mentality....I think you will be certainly shocked
in the end at what really was true and just.
Texas, United States
[789]
#52
Whoever made this ridiculous website...
I heard about Carlton Pearson last night on N.P.R. How wonderful I think it is that he has found a
more humanitarian salvation and realized that peace should always be the ultimate goal. My God is not
the monster that I have learned about in church all my life. My God is a loving and accepting God.
And what fools most Christians are for believing in a literal Hell, anyway! What century is this again?!
Hell can be a place on earth, oftentimes caused by Christians themselves... making people feel lesser
for not believing a certain way. If there were a Hell, I would suspect those Holier-than-thou Christians
would be first in line. Thank God for Carlton Pearson.
Georgia, United States
[744]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Orthodox Christians believe in a literal hell because Jesus Christ said that it exists and that God sends
people there, which settles the question. If you choose to believe otherwise, then your belief is not
based on the teaching of Jesus Christ or the Scripture, but on your own theories which you have no
power to bring into reality and your teacher, Carlton Pearson, is faced with the same inability.
See the article: CARLTON PEARSON
#53
People spoke of Jesus just the way you have written about Richard Roberts saying that what He did
was via demons. If you are concerned pray for these men but do not judge as God says it is not our
place. We are to love one another.
I rang the Richard Roberts helpline for prayer and had an immediate reduction in my problem and
received a revelation from God in how to help it further.
If you do not hear the voice of Jesus how can you be one of His flock as Jesus said my sheep hear my
voice.
I pray that you will see that God works in mysterious ways and yes even the keenest christian can make
mistakes and get it wrong but love is the answer and forgiveness and mercy not thinking we know it all
or know how God may choose to work.
The item about the crumbs was surely Jesus testing the woman's humility she did not turn away even
though He had called her a dog but trusted in His compassion to even help a dog.
God promised laughter through the prophet Isaiah and medics have acknowledged that laughter is
medicine.
United Kingdom
[782]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I don't believe that I have ever stated that I thought Richard Roberts performed by the power of
demons, because I don't believe he has any power at all, so my comments regarding him have no
relation to those made by the Pharisees against Jesus Christ, Matthew 9:34; 12:24; Mark 3:22; Luke
11:15; John 7:20.
Before you dismiss my comments by referring to the judgment prohibited by Jesus Christ, Matthew
7:1-2, you must first deal with the judgments pronounced by your teacher, Richard Roberts, which are
much more serious and deliberate than the criticisms that I have listed against him. If you had been
listening to his television program on October 31, 2005, you would have heard him refer to me directly
by name and you would have heard him state specific judgments against me, and he also created a
false scenario, claiming that I hold to certain beliefs that I do not. He stated the following, indicated in
red type:
"There's a guy on the Internet right now who's name is Gary Hand, who's ah, ah, been beating-up on
me on a regular basis. Because he doesn't believe in healing. Fact, I'm not sure he even knows God."
Since the article that Richard Roberts referred to on my website had been posted for over three years
with no changes, it was a bit of a stretch to claim that I had been beating-up on him on a regular basis,
but that was just the start of his fabrications. Not only did Richard Roberts claim that I do not believe
what actually I do, he took it upon himself to place himself in the position of Jesus Christ in order to
judge the validity of my salvation. I have never judged Richard Roberts in relation to his claim of
salvation, which only Jesus Christ has the authority to do, John 5:22, so I find it very strange that a
person who claims first-hand revelation knowledge directly from the mouth of God, Jesus Christ and
the Holy Spirit would believe that he has that authority or knowledge.
"While there are people out there on the Internet who are preaching against me, because they don't
believe in healing, I know that you believe in healing. And I could care less what that idiot thinks."
Apparently the prophet did not obtain his information about me from God since I do believe in healing
but not in the manner being promoted by Richard Roberts which is his real issue with me, because I
assert that what he claims does not represent the manner of healing in the Scripture.
"He reminds me of the religious leaders who put Jesus on the cross. This guy wouldn't know the Lord if
he met Him coming down the road, and he jumpin' on me for believin' on God to get people healed."
Richard Roberts placed himself in the position of a prognosticating judge, asserting that he knew that
had I been present in the time of Jesus Christ that I would have been one of those who would have
crucified Jesus Christ. That is an abominable statement to make on national television for a man who
claims prophetic revelation from God on virtually a daily basis and who is presenting himself as a model
for the students of the university of which he is the president.
For the second time he asserted that I am not a Christian and do not have salvation because he said
that I do not know Jesus Christ. Richard Roberts is no prophet and he knows virtually zero about the
validity of my salvation because God has never spoken to him on that subject and never will. Whether
or not a person knows God is not the prerogative of Richard Roberts to determine. Only God and
Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit know the reality of salvation in the life of an individual and only Jesus
Christ has the authority to judge a person and declare a person to be saved or damned, John
5:22.
The saddest commentary on Richard Roberts is the fact that he spoke in the name of Jesus Christ and
then proceeded to usurp the position of Jesus Christ by presuming that he had the right, ability,
knowledge and authority to determine the validity of a person's salvation, not based on the message of
the gospel, but solely on opposition to his particular claims regarding healing. I am unaware that the
gospel message contains a provision that agreement with Richard Roberts' claims about healing are a
necessary adjunct of the gospel message and to disagree with his assertions invalidates salvation. If
Richard Roberts or anyone else can point out such a provision in the Scripture, then I will stand
corrected.
In his television broadcast, Richard Roberts employed a deliberate trick used in debates to mislead the
audience, called a "Straw Man" argument, by which he fabricated and contrived false statements against
his opponent and then proceeded to argue against those statements instead of the substance of the
issue. The undiscerning listener would believe that he was eloquently expounding on the oracles of God
through brilliant use of argument against his opponent, but he was only creating a diversion of smoke by
arguing against his own false assertions so that the real issues could be ignored and he could present
himself as being persecuted by a merciless tyrant. I present this, because you need to consider and deal
with some very serious and deep issues in relation to Richard Roberts. If you have not already done so,
I suggest you read the articles on the On Doctrine website:
Richard Roberts
www.ondoctrine.com/10roberr.htm
Oral Roberts
www.ondoctrine.com/10robero.htm
I am happy to hear that your problem has been lessened and hope you continue to improve, however,
what you have described is not an example of healing as found in the Scripture.
First, you contacted a representative of Oral Roberts Ministries, of which Richard Roberts is a part, but
you did not speak to him personally. In the Scripture, there was no anointed ministry through which
persons were healed, but healing was accomplished directly by specified individuals through the power
of God, i.e., prophets, disciples, apostles and Jesus Christ, however, Richard Roberts denies that he
has the power to heal. You have a better case for claiming that you received your healing from the
person with whom you prayed than from Richard Roberts. Your attempt to defend him as an associate
in your claim to a healing is invalid.
Second, your healing was not complete. You claim to have had "an immediate reduction in my
problem" but the problem was not removed. There are no examples of partial healings in the
Scripture.
Third, you "received a revelation from God in how to help it further," so there is no guarantee that the
problem will ever be removed, but only mitigated to a certain degree. There are no healings in the
Scripture that required further effort in order to make the condition better or to be complete at a later
time. All healings in the Scripture were complete at the point of their occurrence with no residual effects
or evidence of the disease or condition having ever existed. There is no middle ground in relation to a
Scriptural healing; either God heals a person immediately, completely and for real or He does not
heal.
Two of the best examples of how complete were the healings in Bible, are Peter's mother-in-law and
the man born lame.
Peter's mother-in-law, Mathew 8:14-15, Mark 1:29-31, Luke 4:38-39, was instantly healed of a
"high-fever," meaning a serious or life-threatening illness, and she then went about the business of
"serving them" or preparing and serving the meal. There was no period of time in which she had to
recover or regain her strength.
The man born lame, Acts 3:1-12, 4:7-31, immediately had his legs made whole so that he jumped up
from the ground and literally ran and leaped in the air. He was not only given the possibility of being
able to walk, but was given all of the muscular coordination and abilities that would have been learned
from infancy to his then current age of more than forty years and he was immediately able to fully use
those abilities that he had never learned or possessed. Not only is healing a restoration of those abilities
that may have been lost, it is the impartation of abilities that a person would have if they had not been ill,
afflicted or an invalid.
I hope you understand that whether or not a person hears the voice of Jesus is not dependent upon
agreement with Richard Roberts in relation to his particular claims about healing. Those who hear the
voice of Jesus are those who believe that Jesus is the Savior and those to whom He gives eternal life,
John 10:24-29, which is a salvation issue, not a healing issue.
My point in relation to Richard Roberts' claim that the children's bread was healing and that it is the
mainline of the gospel, is that his claim is simply not true. Jesus was not preaching a gospel message of
healing, because His message was a continuation of that preached by John the Baptist, "Repent, for the
kingdom of heaven is at hand!" Matthew 3:2, and was a message of salvation through belief and trust in
Himself by those who would be redeemed, "Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins for
unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins," John 8:24 - that is the mainline of the
gospel.
The woman was humble in relation to her response to Jesus Christ, however His purpose in referring to
her as a dog (actually he used the term used for a puppy or a family pet) was to draw out of her the
expression of the reality of her faith, which He acknowledged when He said, "O woman, your faith is
great . . ."
#54
garbage
[783]
#55A
Dear Hand,The Hand of the Lord is against you. Unfortuneatly a demon that has you under it's
influence, (the demon of Baptist doctrine) has polluted your thinking. I was invited to a Baptist church
by an ectoplasmic medium. However since you haven't experienced the Holy Ghost Baptism, You
wouldn't under stand the baptism of the unholy ghosts, some of which are in you.
You are in danger of eternal damnnation for blasphemy of the Holy Ghost. A demon plans your
sermons and caused John MaCarthur to change the Word of God against the warning of the Lord. Not
only that, you are an idolator. I was deceived by MaCarthur when I was a baby Christian. When I
grew up in Jesus he put me in a Baptist church. The interim tongue talking Baptist (in secret) preacher
confessed to me that the former pastor was a mason. Also the board of directors were masons. Since
the oath of their pinnacle is that "Satan is the great archetect of the universe," I guess we know that
Baptists who embrace Freemasonry are not credible theologically. Therefore, clean out the witchcraft
out of your lukewarm pews and you will need puke buckets for the possessed as I have witnessed.
Sounds like your scared of Satan. Bob Larson is not and I've seen him cast out demons. In fact I need
ministry myself and only because I've attacked witchcraft circles and demolished strongholds in the
name of Jesus only to be counter [Rest of message lost during transmission]
[785]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I am always amazed at how many people there are in the religious world who think that they are
prophets. Since when has God given to you a revelation that His hand is against me when He has not
bothered to speak the message to me? I have not been hiding, so I believe that God should have no
trouble delivering the message directly. Since I am "in danger of eternal damnnation for blasphemy of
the Holy Ghost" according to you, perhaps you might explain what that blasphemy is, according to the
Scripture.
I think you are much to close to the occult for comfort, so you should be looking very closely at your
associations before you attempt to classify me in the realm of the demonic. There are no "ectoplasmic
mediums," but there are real demons. You should read what the Scripture says about individuals who
believe that they have superior authority over demons and Satan and can speak with impunity against
them, 2 Peter 2:10b-12, Jude 8-9. I do not fear Satan, because Jesus Christ and the Scripture are my
defense, but I also know that I do not have control or authority over Satan and neither do you or Bob
Larson. Since you believe that you have power over Satan that is reserved only to the Godhead, then
you should be very afraid of where your ignorance is taking you.
At least, do two things for yourself:
1. Spell the man's name right - it is spelled John MacArthur, not John MaCarthur.
2. Get your terminology correct. There are no such entities as ghosts and so there is certainly no ghost
who is holy. The proper manner to address the third person of the Trinity is the Holy Spirit, regardless
of what you might read in the King James version of the Bible.
Since neither I or John MacArthur are Masons or approve of or advocate Masonry, then your
statements do not apply to either one of us. If you have specific issues with John MacArthur, you can
send a message to him at:
letters@gty.org
There are many different types of Baptists and many variations of doctrines adopted by groups who call
themselves Baptists, so if you will explain and show from the Scripture just which ones carry the
demonic plague, I would be quite interested.
I have included your message below, because part of it was cut-off during transmission, so I do not
know what your final statements might have been. If you wish to resend your message in its entirety,
you may use the e-mail address below my signature.
#55B
Always remember, God doesn't speak to unbelievers. He sends prophets. However their ears can't
hear and they have scales on their eyes. We have to tell them even if they refuse to believe. I am always
amazed at how many people there are out there in the religious world who think they are shepherds but
are just hired hands. Johnny When the wolf comes will you run away?
[792]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Always remember, if there is an exception to what you say, in the Scripture, then your statement is not
accurate.
1. God spoke to Satan who believes but rejects what he knows is true, Genesis 3:14-15, Job 1:7-12;
2:2-6.
2. God spoke to Cain who deliberately rejected God, Genesis 4:6-15.
3. God spoke to Abram while he was still a pagan in Ur, Genesis 12:1-3ff.
4. God spoke to the pagan king Abimelech, Genesis 20:6-7.
5. God spoke to Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar even though they spoke falsely against Job, Job
42:7-9.
6. God spoke to the pagan king Nebuchadnezzar from heaven, Daniel 4:31-32.
God does as He pleases and speaks at the times and places of His choosing, not according to what is a
convenient belief to adopt.
Your reply, as a prophet, is that you are either unwilling or unable to explain the reason for your
prophecy. I thought that you might give the explanation as to why God's hand is against me since you
did not include that minor detail in your previous message, but I see that the omission was intentional as
you have not included it in this message as well.
Since God does not speak to "unbelievers", but he just happens to speak through you about me, just
what is it that I don't believe that you consider to be "blasphemy of the Holy Ghost"? If God has given
you that message, then he must have given you the definition of what that blasphemy means, so why
don't you say what it is? God does not condemn without the convicted understanding the charges and
so far you have made the condemnation but left out the reason. Is there part of your revelation that you
left out? You remind me of the prophet Jonah
who did not wish to preach the message that he had been given from God,
"When God saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then God relented concerning the
calamity which he had declared he would bring upon them. And he did not do it. But it greatly
displeased Jonah and he became angry. He prayed to the Lord and said, 'Please Lord, was not this
what I said while I was still in my own country? Therefore in order to forestall this I fled to Tarshish, for
I knew that You are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness,
and one who relents concerning calamity," Jonah 3:10; 4:1-2.
I challenged you to provide the biblical foundation for your statements, which you have not done, so
your claim to be a prophet fails the test.
#55C
[Message received after previous reply being sent by On
Doctrine]
Hey doctrine man you got a copy, come in doctrine man. Go to Veter Nichols site and join the school
of the prophets. Certainly your elementary understanding of the things of God could be improved upon.
You also said previous that there were no ecto mediums. Please expound upon how you arrived at this
conclusion. Johnny Prophet enemy of the witch. P.S. I suppose you think there are no witches
either.
[795]
#55D
I have explained in the greek and it is elementary why the spiritual gifts will not cease until the second
coming and I know all the scriptures you cite. Hopefully your pators only cult mentality will be
corrected by the Lord before you die so your not judged in the lake of fire with the rest of the
blasphemers. Quite simply. I'll just refer you to Joel and peter who quoted Joel. Your son and
daughters... Your young men... and these are the last days. I know you know scripture as do all
Baptists and Jehovah Witnesses who have an almost with the Mormans, similar agument for the ceasing
of the gifts. Again people search for miracles in the occult because of your doctrine and I gurantee that
if you continue to fight against God while the world goes to hell with the bucket brigade, you will join
them. Hopefully God will chastise you real soon for lipping off to Him. He is the same and never
changes. His doctrine never changed when the Apostles died neither. There are no exceptions. Just
keep the Word in context
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Since you have not bothered to explain anything, whether it be Greek or otherwise, I guess my
understanding must remain in the elementary state; you know, just based on what I read in the
Scripture.
The Scripture states that God created the heavens, angelic hosts (which include Satan and his angelic
followers who are demons), the physical earth and universe, plants, animals and human beings. I don't
recall that there is any indication that ectoplasmic states of being are part of that creation.
You may not presume that I do not believe in witches. In the Old Testament, God commanded that
witches should be killed, Exodus 22:18, Deuteronomy 20:27. One of the reasons that king Saul died, 1
Chronicles 10:13, was the fact that he consulted a medium, the witch of Endor, 1 Samuel
28:7-25. In the Scripture, witches are designated as being sorcerers (male and female), soothsayers,
spiritists and mediums. The witch of Endor was a medium, Jezebel was a witch, 1 Kings 9:22,
and the religion of Egypt was based on occultic practices, Isaiah 19:3.
Witches are willing channels through which demons operate in the occultic system. Such was the case
when the Egyptian magicians duplicated plagues of blood and frogs brought against them by God
through Moses and Aaron at the beginning of the Exodus and is the reason that witches appear to have
mystical and magical power. The antichrist and false prophet are empowered through the occultic use
of Satanic and demonic power, and perform miracles during the tribulation period that are so
compelling and spectacular that even true Christian believers would be deceived if it were possible,
Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22,
From what I can discern regarding your miscellaneous ramblings, you are claiming that I am a
blasphemer because I disagree with your particular view regarding spiritual gifts, your claim to have
power over the occult and your claim to be a prophet. You also make that disagreement the foundation
for your claim that not to believe as you do condemns a person to hell. So you have rewritten the
gospel message to suit your purposes. I am unaware that the gospel message of salvation includes the
provision that to agree with you about your claims to have spiritual power over demons and witches
and to accept your view of the application of spiritual gifts is a necessary requirement in order to obtain
salvation. If you can present such a requirement from the Scripture, I will stand
corrected.
If people require miracles to confirm their belief, then they may find them through the power of the
occult, however their belief will not be based on faith but on their experiences and feelings through
which deception is easily effected. A miracle and the positive feelings and emotions that follow are not
the confirmation of truth.
Whether God is the same, Jesus is the same or the Holy Spirit is the same says nothing about the issue
of miracles. God can choose to do a miracle any time He pleases to do so, just as He can choose not
to do a miracle. What you are actually saying is, God MUST perform miracles since you believe that
He does the same things in the same manner at all times. However, that is not the case.
There are many who appeal to the immutability of God in order to justify a particular theological
doctrine. But the unchangeable nature of God says nothing about the changeable nature of His creation
or the variations in His commands. What you are attempting to say is that Christians should be looking
for the miraculous on a continuing basis, and those who deny that viewpoint are driving people to look
for the miraculous in the occult. Is there some particular reason why God must always do the same
things in the same manner at all times? Is God sovereign in His own choices and actions or is He not? If
God is sovereign, then He can do as He pleases through any means at any time. If God is not
sovereign, then He is not God. You are attempting to place God in your own little box in order to make
Him conform to your theology instead of you conforming to the reality of who God is and how He
chooses to reveal Himself.
If you say that the fact that God does not change, Malachi 3:6, or that Jesus Christ does not change,
Hebrews 13:8, also indicates that their commands cannot change or are not given and removed at Their
good pleasure, or Their actions cannot change, then you have ignored history and the revelation in the
Scriptures. There are many things that have changed in the Scripture and there are many things that
have occurred in the past but are not seen today and were part of the Old Testament but not part of the
New Testament and vice versa. So, if the immutability of God determines what is seen in the Scripture,
then why are those things no longer apparent?
1. Satan was the highest of God's created angelic beings, but he will suffer eternal punishment as the
lowest.
2. Adam and Eve were created as the innocent, but became the fallen.
3. The universe was created good, but has become corrupted.
4. God told Adam and Eve to eat plants, Genesis 12:9, He then told Noah to eat plants and
animals, Genesis 9:3, then He told Israel that some animals could not be eaten because they were
unclean, Leviticus 11:1-47, then he told Peter that all unclean animals were now considered clean
and
could be eaten, Acts 10:9-48.
5. God commanded circumcision to Abraham and then to Israel in the Law of Moses, but it is
specifically denied by the apostle Paul, Galatians 5:2.
6. God commanded Abraham to kill his son Isaac, Genesis 22:2, and then commanded that he
not
hurt his son, Genesis 22:12.
7. God commanded the construction of a temple in the Old Testament, so why isn't one commanded in
the New Testament and why don't Christians worship at a temple in Jerusalem?
8. God commanded animal sacrifices Exodus 20:24, then declared that He did not desire sacrifices,
Psalm 40:6, Psalm 51:17, Hosea 6:6, Matthew 9:13, and then sacrifices are not part of the New
Testament, Hebrews 10:1-18
9. How many floods have covered the earth recently? Did God really say that He would never destroy
the earth with a flood again? Why doesn't God continue to flood the earth again and again, isn't He the
same today as He was yesterday?
Genesis 8.
10. Has God appeared in burning bushes lately?
Exodus 3:2-4.
11. Has the Shekinah cloud, as a pillar of cloud by day and pillar of fire by night, been leading
Christians around the earth recently?
Exodus 13:21-22.
12. Is there poison water being made drinkable by preachers throwing trees into it?
Exodus 15:23-25.
13. Have there been any miracle appearances of quail for food recently?
Exodus 16:12-13.
14. Has there been any manna coming out of heaven recently?
Exodus 16:4-5, 14-36.
15. Is there miracle water coming out of rocks?
Exodus 17:5-6
16. How many of today's 'prophets' have called fire down from heaven?
1 Kings 18:20-40.
17. Where were the miracles in the 400 years prior to the coming of Jesus Christ?
18. How many people have died at the altar recently, because they have lied to the Holy
Spirit?
Acts 5:1-10
19. How many people have been raised from the dead recently by today's 'apostles'?
Acts 20:9-10
20. How many jail cells have recently been opened by an angel and Christians set free?
Acts 12:7-10.
My point is, that the immutability of God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit does not provide a
foundation for the claim that miracles can and must happen today because they occurred during the life
of Jesus Christ and in the early church.
Jesus said to the apostle Thomas:
"Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did
not see, and yet believed," John 20:29.
The person whose faith is dependent on seeing a miracle, has no real faith, since their salvation must
also be dependent on seeing Jesus Christ. How will a person have faith in Jesus Christ, who they have
not seen, if their faith is based on the seeing of a miracle?
". . . so that the proof of your faith, being more precious than gold which is
perishable, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the
revelation of Jesus Christ; and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see
Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, obtaining the
outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls," 1 Peter 1:7-9.
You should be very careful before you assume that you have the right to condemn a person to hell
because they disagree with your view of miracles, because to do so you usurp the position of Jesus
Christ who is the only person who has authority to judge in relation to salvation. The Scripture says that
even God does not make that judgment but has given that authority to the Son, John 5:22.
Just as an aside, early Mormons spoke in tongues, claimed healing power and claimed that certain
individuals had been raised from the dead. The Mormon president is considered to be a revelator,
prophet, seer and said to be able to translate any religious writing in existence. So, I would not classify
them with all Baptists and Jehovah's Witnesses. As I mentioned before, not ALL Baptists believe the
same, so they do not ALL conform to your classification.
#55E
Gods miracles always change. God doesn't. Pray for understanding and let your God out of your
arrogent Baptist Doctrine box. Your "God in a box" comment was hatched in Baptist Bible colleges
and is prob. where you heard it as did my hot air breathing Sunday school teachers.
Sadly you don't belive Christians are channels for which the Holy Spirit chooses to operate. However
you believe that witches are channels for demons. So you have faith for the occult but no faith for God.
Certainly God does as He pleases. He also is pleased when we do what he commanded in
demonstrating his power. It's not a profound or new revelation. You act as though being a disciple and
working miracles in Jesus name is a crime or a sin or the demons operating to deceive Christians. But,
like Jesus said, "A kingdom divided against itself will not" stand and thats why you missed it. You
choose pride over the truth. Beelzebub has no desire to give Christ credit. You probably never
infiltrated a psychic fair to see the counterfeit healers doing what Christians do. They omit one name
however, Jesus of Nazereth. Satans counterfeit healing movement doesn't negate Gods command for us
to "heal the sick and cast out Demons" You need to grow up, and go learn from Bob Larson, pay the
fee if there is one at a traini [Rest of message lost during transmission]
[814]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
You presented the immutability of God argument in order to support your claims, but now you change
your position and deny the foundation of your argument. Again, as a prophet, you fail the test because I
have never attended a Baptist Bible college, so you presume to know what you do not.
You make statements on subjects about which you have no direct knowledge such as your claims that I
preach sermons (which I don't), that I went to a Baptist Bible college (which I didn't), that I don't
believe in witches (which I do), and that I don't believe that Christians are a channel for the Holy Spirit
(which I do).
Which Baptist college originated the "God in a box" comment? I have been accused of placing God in a
box by many people in the Charismatic movement, so I don't think it is a unique claim by
Baptists.
I am quite sure that God is pleased when we do what he commands, John 14:21, but the question that I
have for you is, where in the Scripture are Christians commanded by God or Jesus Christ to cast out
demons or given the power to do so? Jesus Christ exercises control over the Satanic world, but
Christians do not, which is why Christians are taught to resist the devil instead of commanding authority
over him, Ephesians 6:10-18.
As I mentioned in my first reply, I believe that you are much too close to the occult for comfort.
#56
Dear Man Of GOD,
On line I typed in Oral Roberts out of curiosity. There I saw that he had been hospitalized. Desiring to
know more I opened the link. To my dismay I found nothing about his condition! Instead your agenda
was there! You bated me and then you switched! You did what you had to do, to get me to your site.
As a result I wouldn't believe anything, you wrote against anyone,in the name of TRUTH! I read a few
sentences and left your page! In the end Adoni will judge OUR hearts. That I do trust! YOU I
DON'T!
You are in my prayers!
Shalom
[810]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
I think you have a misunderstanding about how the results are gathered when you search the
Internet
for specific information. I am not sure what search engine you used, perhaps AOL or Google? Search
engine information is gathered by companies who send out programs (robots) on the Internet and
gather information from the websites which they find, of which On Doctrine is only one of millions. That
information is categorized and made available to persons like you who are entering information that you
wish to find. On Doctrine does not have any control over the information that is gathered by those
companies and their robots and the manner in which it is presented by them when you enter your search
information.
There is no "bait and switch" involved in what you encountered, because On Doctrine
makes no decision in relation to the information that is presented as a result of your search criteria being
processed by the search engine that you chose.
The GOOGLE search engine ( www.google.com ) presents the following information on page one, third line
when the following information is requested, Oral Roberts hospital
=============================================================
ORAL ROBERTS
Roberts was taken by ambulance to a local hospital, where he was expected to
...
www.ondoctrine.com/10robero.htm - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
=============================================================
The information regarding Oral Roberts having been in the hospital was extracted by Google from the
On Doctrine website and a quote of part of the information in the article is presented. Many times the
search information is not accurate, because different parts of an article may be combined that do not
represent accurately the information that is being requested, so it is important to visit the website
indicated and read what is actually posted. From the information that appeared in the search results,
there is no way to know whether Oral Roberts went to the hospital today, yesterday or years ago
unless you go to the link provided and read the information. If you had completely read the article about
Oral Roberts, you would have found two references to his hospitalization at the end of the article under
the subtitle "Inability To Heal" and you would have seen how those references fit in with
the subject.
I am sorry you were confused as to what you found in the search results, but it is presumed by the
search engine companies that users understand the limitations of the information they present, and we,
as webmasters, must very often accept that information in the format presented because it is not within
our power to make changes. The only exception to that would probably be with websites who pay the
search engine companies to have their websites shown at the top of the lists and they may be able to
present information in a format that is more acceptable to them. On Doctrine does not pay to have its
information listed.
You may not believe my explanation, but like the articles posted on the website, I do not expect people
to always believe what I write, so I always say, "Do your own research, because what you find
for yourself will either confirm or disprove what I say." If I am wrong, you are most welcome to
present the facts of the matter.
#57
hall of shame
the trash that you think is truth re: ministries is shocking and blasphamy to the Holy Spirit....the men are
perhaps at fault, but the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Godhead and the sin agains Him or
blasphemy of Him is NEVER forgiven in this world or the next...watch it would you like to retract
your statements or are you the perfect one who judes the ministries...
YES I AGREE THAT THERE IS MUCH TO BE DESIRED IN THE BODY OF CHRIST
TODAY...HOWEVER MORE OF THE POWER GIFTS WOULD GET THE ATTENTION OF
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING FOR THE REALITY OF LIFE...WHICH STARTS AND
ENDS WITH GOD...YOURMESSAGES JUST HELP THE DEVIL GET HIS HANDS ON THEIR
LIVES..
THE BIBLE SAYS IF YOU HAVE A FAULT WITH SOMEONE, GO THE THEM CAREFULLY
AND TELL THEM LEST YOU FALL. YOU NEED TO TAKE THE LOG OUT OF YOUR EYE
BEFORE YOU TAKE THE SPECK OUT OF SOMEONE ELSES. READ THE ENTIRE
WORD.
I THINK IN JUSES; DAY YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN A PHARISEE OR SADUCEE,
DEPENDING WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IN THE RESSURECTION OR NOT.
NOT BUYING A PACK OF LIES
Texas, United States
[821]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
It would be helpful if you were a little more clear about what you are attempting to say.
1. What do you mean that the men listed in the Hall of Shame "are perhaps at fault." Who or what else
would be at fault? Has any other entity taken their place and said or done what they did not, but given
credit to them? If those people have not said or done what I stated, then you can present the truth of
the matter for my consideration. If they have said or done what I stated, then why are they not
responsible?
2. What does the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit have to do with what I claim are the statements and
conduct of the people listed in the Hall of Shame? If you wish to accuse me of blasphemy, then you
need to actually present a case by means of a logical and rational argument with a proper definition,
which you have not even attempted to do.
3. Jesus said to the apostle Thomas in relation to his unbelief about the resurrection, "Because you have
seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed," John
20:29.
Jesus also stated, in the story about the rich man and Lazarus, "And he said, 'Then I beg you, father,
that you send him to my father's house--for I have five brothers--in order that he may warn them, so
that they will not also come to this place of torment.' But Abraham said, 'They have Moses and the
Prophets; let them hear them.' But he said, 'No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the
dead, they will repent!' But he said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not
be persuaded even if someone rises form the dead,'" Luke 16:27-31.
If you believe that miracles will confirm the reality of the gospel message to an unbelieving world, then
Jesus Christ stated the case against that belief, and His crucifixion proves beyond a doubt that the
greatest miracle-worker was not acceptable when He confronted the sins of those who only wanted
their diseases healed and their bellies filled with food.
If people are looking for the reality of life, then they don't have the reality of salvation and are already in
the hands of the devil, which is precisely the reason that they need to hear the gospel message. It is the
power of the gospel message itself, coupled with the call of God that brings a person to repentance and
salvation, and not the self-proclaimed anointing of those leaders who trample the integrity of their
position of trust, Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 1:22-24.
4. You appear to believe that it is better to keep immoral and illegal conduct and false doctrine a secret,
because to expose it will compromise the presentation of the gospel message. The Scripture states the
requirements for leadership in the church, 1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-16. If you believe that leaders
are exempt from responsibility to the Scripture for their conduct and doctrine, and are not subject to
exposure, discipline and forfeiture of ministry as a result of their failure to follow the biblical mandate,
then you need to take the issue to the apostle Paul.
How is it that the apostle Paul confronted the apostle Peter publicly for his error, Galatians 2:11ff, and
the Bereans subjected the teachings of the apostle Paul to the Scripture, Acts 17:11? Are you willing to
accuse the apostle Paul and the Bereans of blasphemy?
I guess you're trying to say that leaders who are immoral or lie or engage in illegal conduct only have
little tiny specks in their eyes while those who reveal the conduct have logs in theirs. Just how that twist
of reality works, you will have to explain.
5. Your Sadducee /Pharisee scenario is a little weak and much too late, since I have already been
denounced by a professional accuser, Richard Roberts, of being a person who, if I had been present in
the time of Jesus Christ, would have crucified Him. Although your charge is not nearly as serious as his,
they are both in the same category of nonsense. I don't lose any sleep over those types of
histrionics.
6. Apparently you believe that what I have said is a lie, although you have not indicated what that lie
might be. If you wish to believe that, you are quite welcome to do so, however, since you have made
the charge, then it is your responsibility to present the examples and state a rebuttal, otherwise, you are
simply expressing an emotional reaction to what you have read without any substance to the matter. If
you can't present a case, then you should not commit yourself to a very serious statement of error about
which you will eventually find to be very embarrassing.
|
|
 COPYRIGHT © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004,
2005 by ON DOCTRINE & ONDOCTRINE.COM, All Rights Reserved
|
|