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/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]
| | |