WOF doctrine may have sparked BAD Economy

[Gerald Creasy]

Gerald, I could care less if you believe me or not.
You have carved out your own life with your attitude, I fear you will die a lonely, broken man.

Better lonely and broken than a sell out to Christianize witchcraft.

You have given the impression that I have declared that Jesus is not God, That I have denied His diety. That my friend is false. I asked you to post my comment of such. You could not. Because I never made it. In fact I have on different occasions posted what my beliefs are.

You know full well that What you are saying is not true.

I have emailed you your statement and you pretend you never said it.

The post is in the doctine forum where you said that stopping someone from preaching Jesus was not God might derail a miracle and destroy someones fatih.

AS if: 1) Faith in a non divine Jesus could bring healing
2) An abstract concept of faith is more important than the divinity
of Jesus.

I do not ask for an apology of your blatent lie concerning me, for I know that in your current state you are incapable of it. So I choose to forgive you.

Lets see:

You are involved in Christianized Witchcraft.
You claim that faith is more important than the divinity of Jesus.
You work under a man who said God too was a man and Jesus was raped by Roman soldiers.

Yeah, I'm gonna apologize to YOU.

[Pastor Gary]

For anyone/everyone who really believes that you read scrpture purely, without the filters and biases of culture, experience, etc., I'll suggest the following for your consideration:

Walter Brueggemann, William Placher, and Brian Blount. Struggling with Scripture. John Knox Press, 2002. (primarily thoughts from Brueggeman).

Charles Kraft and Marguerite Kraft. Christianity in Culture: A Study in Dynamic Biblical Theologizing in Cross-Cultural Perspective, rev. ed.. Orbis Books. 2005.

Paul Hiebert. Anthropological Insights for Missionaries. Baker, 1985.

Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All It's Worth. Zondervan, 1993.

How far do you extend that Gary?

I keep asking but you keep ignoring my question.

Is NOTHING defineable because everyone interprets and brings things to their interpretation?

IS there a line to be drawn?

Why do you ignore these questions?

I agree that people take things to their interpretations but I see that there is a plain line that cannot be crossed.

The very divine nature of Christ can not be sacrificed in the name of love.

Or is the "divine nature of Christ" a matter of interpretation?

Apparantly so if Christology is less important than group hugs and warm fuzzys.

If the very nature of Christ is a matter of interpretation then the "good news" must be gotten out to the teens in your church: PArty HArty! Your pastor believes everything is a matter of interpretation. Tell him his view of sin is just his Southern Upbringing flavoring his reading of scripture and he's trying to force his interpretation of it down your throat.

Oh it's okay to comprimise on the very nature Jesus but not when it comes to the matter of influincing the behavior of those in your church???

Go ahead and prove this love that is greater than defending the very nature of Christ: Push the delete button.

The more you continue down this path, the more ridiculous you sound. My teaching and preaching (and stand for Christ and holiness) are a matter of public record, with hundreds of hours of sermons online.

Question for you: When Jesus encountered people who didn't understand who he was, or misunderstood who he was, what was his reaction toward them? Rejection? Love?

[Gerald Creasy]

The more you continue down this path, the more ridiculous you sound. My teaching and preaching (and stand for Christ and holiness) are a matter of public record, with hundreds of hours of sermons online.

Question for you: When Jesus encountered people who didn't understand who he was, or misunderstood who he was, what was his reaction toward them? Rejection? Love?

No sir. Not ridiculous at all.

I am taking your claims which you make without qualifications and asking: Do you really believe this without qualifications.

I have even extended myself by saying I believe that people DO take their own constructs to scripture but believe there are ceratin points that are plain enough that do not need "interpretation".

You also misunderstand me: I am not challenging your position on Christ and holiness.

I AM ASKING WHAT EFFECT DOES THE "everyone interprets" HAVE on that preaching?

If "everyone interprets" is not qualified it UNDERMINES all preaching no matter WHAT you are preaching about because EVERYTHING can be summed up with "everyone brings their own flavor to scripture" and "that's just his interpretation" I don't have to stick to his interpretation to be a Christian.

In other words DO YOU EXTEND to those under you the same sense of "love above all" when it comes to Christian behavior, that you do to those whom you consider your intellectual equals in worshipping with those who have serious theological problems.

If their "christology" does not matter if you just love them why does their "hamartology" then matter?

The doctrine of sin can be rationalized away with the same claim of "exclusivist" charge you lay at my door for my defense of Christology.

Why should your congregation buy into your "exclusivist" doctrine of sin (which actually does exclude) when "everything is interpretation" and they feel they are justified in doing what they want in "their interpretation".

As for your last question: Christs concluding reaction to those who rejected him was what?

[Pastor Gary]

As for your last question: Christs concluding reaction to those who rejected him was what?

That's not what I asked... I never used the word "rejected."

Question for you: When Jesus encountered people who didn't understand who he was, or misunderstood who he was, what was his reaction toward them? Rejection? Love?

[paul]

Gerald said

There was a conversation a year or so ago in which I said I would stand up and Stop someone who was preaching Jesus was not God (this was in direct discussion pertaining to Creflo Dollar -a WOF adherent- who preaches just that)

YOU said you would NOT stop someone preaching such because someones faith would be destroyed or that their miracle might be derailed AND that anyone who DID stand up to stop it was "full of pride"

EDIT: HERE IT IS
Quote:
Gerald, when I read the above post I will tell you exactly what I saw. I saw you sitting in a meeting with one of these men you hate so much. With you was a child stricken with Cancer. The man came out and during his ministering He stopped and said, the Lord showed me a child here stricken with cancer. The Lord said tonight you will receive your healing please come forward. Immediately you jumped up and screamed out… “ You are a Liar “ and took the child out of the building without being prayer for, and the child died, because of your pride.
This was a response to the statment made about Creflo Dollar preaching Jesus wasnt GOd.

Gerald when you said that you would stand up and stop someone who was preaching jesus was not God. The spirit in which you operate would not be to defend the word or faith, but rather to prove yourself right and other wrong in order to rectify so wrong you perceive that was perprated on you or someone you know. That is my perception and that is what illicited the above response.
As I mentioned, I am not prophectic, nor do I claim to operate in that gifting. But when I read your post it was like a movie in front of me. No where in that quote nor any other did I ever say that Jesus is not God, nor challenge in anyway His diety.
As a matter of fact, I told you that my premis is that God is sovriegn, that God can choose to heal whomever, whenever, however He so desires. Man is not the healer, Jesus is the Healer. If a person comes to a crusade or meeting as they did in AJT time ( whom you have labeled a cult leader) and be healed, then it can happen again today wether it be Benny Hinn, Crefflo, Oral Roberts, Gary Langley, the current General Overseer. It is by their faith and the sovrienty of God.

These are your accusation:
You are involved in Christianized Witchcraft. Am I ? Because I read a book by someone does not mean I embrace their teachings.

You claim that faith is more important than the divinity of Jesus. Where I have ever said that you are drawing your own conclusion.

You work under a man who said God too was a man and Jesus was raped by Roman soldiers.
Again you are drawing your own conclusions. I do not work under any of the ones you might think I do. The organization I founded is independent, we are not affiliated with any other organizations. I am not licensed by any WOF organization. I do not work for Kenneth Copeland if that is who you are refering to. I have an international board of directors made up of men from different countries and different religious backgrounds. Sorry to disappoint you

[Gerald Creasy]

Question for you: When Jesus encountered people who didn't understand who he was, or misunderstood who he was, what was his reaction toward them? Rejection? Love?

You tell me: What does your subjective interpretation with all you bring to it tell you?

Is it different than what scripture says?

When he was in Nazareth and they saw him as The Carpenters son,
He did not works,
When people followed after him because their bellys were filled,
He took a boat to get away
When those religious -with their idea of The Messiah-took offense,
He offended them even more "You are of your father the devil"
And those whos understanding was shallow,
he drove away with talk of eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

It seems aparant from scripture that "What one thought of Christ" was a supremely important factor with how he dealt with them.

I don't see a Hippie running around singing "love is all you need".

[dolfan]

To go back and stake out ground on how Jesus treated those who misunderstood Him is useful if the question is how do we treat people on the periphery of faith, people who aren't yet convinced that He is Lord. The encounter with Nicodemus is the classic example of His attitude toward the genuinely inquiring heart. Then, there are others whose inquiries were fake, and He blasted them (the Pharisees and Sadducees, that is). Both sides of that coin exist together.

Seems to me the more relevant question is how do we treat believers who have a flawed, or "seriously flawed", Christology. Well, I think that all goes back to what part or aspect of their faith and belief is truly flawed. Some things are probably not game-breakers. Does water baptism as demonstrated by Christ actually save people? Church of Christ folks think so, and that you can't be saved without it. We're all content to let them, I think. Does someone believe that Christ is a mode of appearance of God and not a person? Yeah. Well, if so, do they have any other means of learning differently? If not, am I to shun them over that error?? They fully intend to embrace the Jesus of the Bible. They have "accepted Christ", they have joined a church body, they read the Bible, they abstain from sinful practices as best they understand them to be sinful, but they believe some things about Jesus and His relation to the Father and Holy Spirit that put them quite outside our trinitarian views. For me, I can fellowship with them on the basis where they now are. Chances are 100% that some errors exist in my Christology too.

[Gerald Creasy]

To go back and stake out ground on how Jesus treated those who misunderstood Him is useful if the question is how do we treat people on the periphery of faith, people who aren't yet convinced that He is Lord. The encounter with Nicodemus is the classic example of His attitude toward the genuinely inquiring heart. Then, there are others whose inquiries were fake, and He blasted them (the Pharisees and Sadducees, that is). Both sides of that coin exist together.

Seems to me the more relevant question is how do we treat believers who have a flawed, or "seriously flawed", Christology. Well, I think that all goes back to what part or aspect of their faith and belief is truly flawed. Some things are probably not game-breakers. Does water baptism as demonstrated by Christ actually save people? Church of Christ folks think so, and that you can't be saved without it. We're all content to let them, I think. Does someone believe that Christ is a mode of appearance of God and not a person? Yeah. Well, if so, do they have any other means of learning differently? If not, am I to shun them over that error?? They fully intend to embrace the Jesus of the Bible. They have "accepted Christ", they have joined a church body, they read the Bible, they abstain from sinful practices as best they understand them to be sinful, but they believe some things about Jesus and His relation to the Father and Holy Spirit that put them quite outside our trinitarian views. For me, I can fellowship with them on the basis where they now are. Chances are 100% that some errors exist in my Christology too.

Again I have to ask WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?

If the rule is Everyone has errors so we must accept everyoes errors, how much error then becomes TOO much?????

Can a person be a believer if they Believe Jesus was not God?

Can a person be a believer if a person believes Jesus was JUST a prophet?

Can a person be a believer if they believe Jesus is the Archangel Michael?

Can a person be a believer if his Jesus is nothing but a step-n-fetch-it for
that persons own carnal desires?

Can a person be a believer if Jesus and Satan are brothers?

Can a person be a believe if his Jesus is a clumsy buffoon craving salsa?

All of these beliefs are in Christianity today.

Where do we stop?

OH! We can't stop! We have to love them all and not resist.

Not only have we thrown the baby out with the bathwater but we've whipped out our .45 of love and unloaded a clip into the squaling child.

[Pastor Gary]

Again I have to ask WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?

I, personally, draw the line with this: I am not God. God is God. He is not the slightest bit worried about His reputation, for He is in control. I am on a journey, and have not yet arrived. I once believed and taught things that were wrong... it is possible that in ten years I will look back with dismay and regret at some of the things I now hold to be true. (I thought I had all the answers then, and realize how foolish that was.)

I respect the fact that others are also on a journey. They may be further along than I am, and look at me as foolish and unlearned, as I might look at those behind me on the journey as in need of enlightenment.

The question, for me, is do I trust God —— CAN I trust God —— to sort out who is "in" and who is "out" (see Hiebert, 1978, "Conversion, Culture and Cognitive Categories") or is it my personal responsibility to apply a series of Theological litmus tests to judge (as if it matters to them anyway what I think) the salvation of others?

[Gerald Creasy]

Again I have to ask WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?

I, personally, draw the line with this: I am not God. God is God. He is not the slightest bit worried about His reputation, for He is in control. I am on a journey, and have not yet arrived. I once believed and taught things that were wrong... it is possible that in ten years I will look back with dismay and regret at some of the things I now hold to be true. (I thought I had all the answers then, and realize how foolish that was.)

I respect the fact that others are also on a journey. They may be further along than I am, and look at me as foolish and unlearned, as I might look at those behind me on the journey as in need of enlightenment.

The question, for me, is do I trust God —— CAN I trust God —— to sort out who is "in" and who is "out" (see Hiebert, 1978, "Conversion, Culture and Cognitive Categories") or is it my personal responsibility to apply a series of Theological litmus tests to judge (as if it matters to them anyway what I think) the salvation of others?

Congratulations. You are one step away from Universalism.

[Pastor Gary]

Congratulations. You are one step away from Universalism.

You are less than one step away from ignorance.

(Despite your strongly held views, you are NOT the Special Assistant to the Holy Spirit in Charge of Everyone Else's Doctrinal Purity.)

You really have no argument at all with what I personally believe: you are angry that I refuse to hate the people you hate.

[Gerald Creasy]

Congratulations. You are one step away from Universalism.

You are less than one step away from ignorance.

Come now Is there a class at Fuller on how to insult those you disagree with? Surely after dealing with me you have enough experience to be grandfathered in (and should do a little better than that).


If you are not gonna stand for anything, upon what basis will you stand against sin?
You've sacrificed your moral compass by equating your Jesus with every idiot that comes down the pike.

[Pastor Gary]

Come now Is there a class at Fuller on how to insult those you disagree with?

You have been blasting me (personally) for days Gerald, so it is a bit funny to hear you whine when I push back.

[Gerald Creasy]

Come now Is there a class at Fuller on how to insult those you disagree with?

You have been blasting me (personally) for days Gerald, so it is a bit funny to hear you whine when I push back.

No sir I have not been blasting you PERSONALLY in the slightest.

I have asked for you to explain what you mean and to what extent you mean it.

It's that simple.


I can not see how if Christ doesnt matter, then sin should.

If Christ doesnt matter, why then insist that he is needed at all??

If any belief about Christ can be held and it's all okay, then the belief he is not needed can be held as well.
If you say this is not true that Christ is needed, how then do you establish WHICH Christ is needed? Yours, or another.

If you say YOURS, upon what basis do you claim that yours is the correct Jesus that they need??

Without a proper understanding of who Christ is what then becomes of Christianity? It becomes a collection of people deidicated to the pursuit of an ideal CALLED Jesus that can be anything, everything or nothing at all.

It is no longer Christianity at all.

[Pastor Gary]

Come now Is there a class at Fuller on how to insult those you disagree with?

You have been blasting me (personally) for days Gerald, so it is a bit funny to hear you whine when I push back.

No sir I have not been blasting you PERSONALLY in the slightest.

Unless, of course, one might take these kind of statements personally...

"It is not I that have been educated to the level that God is not real or how you define Jesus dosent matter."

"I am sorry to see you have sold out, Gary."