Victoria Osteen and Her Joy-Robbing Brand of Cheap Christianity

Christian Post ^ | September 2, 2014 | Matt Moore

[MamaB]

Why are you defending this character so much? Do some research on him like I did months and months ago. He does not teach Biblical principles. When I saw him the first time a long time ago, I wondered if anyone in that congregation could tell anyone the plan of salvation. I still wonder that. He is leading people astray.

[PapaNew]

He said, I believe you have to know Christ. But I think that if you know Christ, if you're a believer in God, you're going to have some good works.

Later, he fumbled with whether people of other religions are going to go to Heaven. I've already addressed that in a previous post.

Nevertheless, Osteen later apologized for not being clearer in his answer.

And yet this is why the Pharisees call him a heretic who denies Jesus? That is sad.

[PapaNew]

basically you're telling us that Jesus never claimed to people to be the only way to heaven

Not that it's relevant (this is about Joel not me), but no, I never said that at all. You put words in my mouth like you do Joel apparently.

John 10 is Jesus teaching. In other places Jesus is healing. In other places Jesus is showing compassion. These are not mutually exclusive. Jesus displayed all the ministerial gifts, but we don't each have all the ministerial gifts or "office" (Rom 12:4-8).

Joel doesn't display a healing ministry either but that doesn't invalidate his ministry. As I have already said, Joel has a ministry of encouragement, not a teaching or healing ministry.

[PapaNew]

Metmom, we’re going around in circles. You’re repeating yourself and forcing me to repeat myself which I’m not interested in doing.

You haven’t proven that Joel Osteen is a heretic or denies Jesus is the only way to heaven.

[narses]

The poisoned fruit of the protestant rebellion against God’s Church.

[PapaNew]

plan of salvation

The Bible says if you call on the name of Jesus you will be saved (Acts 2:21; Rom 10:13). TWICE each service, he leads people to pray the prayer to accept Jesus as well as the many thousands in the large Night of Hope events as well. How is that "leading people astray"?

[PapaNew]

Why are you defending this character so much?

I don't know. Maybe one reason is becasue you and others attack Joel with such a mean spirit - vicious and rigid. Yet your evidence that he deserves such treatment is so paltry. Much of it boils down to a personal preference or disagreement with Joel.

It's not like you say, "I don't agree with Joel." That would be one thing. That could certainly be understandable as many among God's people don't agree with each other about a lot of stuff.

But you're so rigid and harsh in your criticism of Joel. And it's like you turn a personal dislike into some kind of doctrinal heresy. I guess that's why I defend him. The guy doesn't have a mean bone in his body and leads many to receive Jesus in their lives. He just doesn't do it in a way that you like.

[Zuriel]

**(5) On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.(6) When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.**

So you believe that they received the Holy Ghost in verse 5, but the Holy Ghost didn’t come on them until Paul laid his hands on them?

That’s definitely spinning things to meet an anti-water baptism position.

**And here’s Peter correcting his earlier mindset that water was required for baptism: Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.**

Corrected his earlier mindset? Peter baptized because he was commanded to by the Lord. Matt. 28:19.

So you are saying his command to baptise Cornelius and his household, after the Lord baptized them with the Holy Ghost, was a mindset that needed corrected? And that he corrected himself when back at Jerusalem?????

Philip baptized the Samaritans. Then God baptized them with the Holy Ghost. “A man must be born of water and of the Spirit..”.

Man baptizes the seeker in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins (as the Lord commanded), and the Lord baptizes with the Holy Ghost.

From the beginning of creation it is clearly seen...(types and shadows)

From a world, dead and covered with water, God brought forth life. And did it again with Noah’s flood.

Under the Law, the priest could not begin the blood sacrifices with out first washing in the laver.

Namaan the Syrian, a leper, (a man as good as dead), was given new life after immersing in the Jordan.

Paul showed the symbolism to the saints at Corinth: “Moreover, brethern, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that ALL our fathers were under the cloud, and ALL passed THROUGH the sea. And were ALL baptized unto Moses IN the cloud and IN the sea.” 1Cor. 10:1,2

[Zuriel]

**Salvation has two aspects - justification and sanctification.**

Justified by His blood, sanctified by His Spirit.

**It is here where water baptism plays an important role - a ritual cleansing showing we are no longer part of the world, but citizens of another. It was also a public sign of dedication to service, such as the baptism of Jesus.**

A ritual cleansing..??
You say it doesn’t wash away sins, but it still cleanses??

Peter says it SAVES us. Man says it doesn’t,...but it’s somehow important?!?!

I cover this more in post 228.

[Zuriel]

**If the man didn’t walk the mile it’s evident that God didn’t draw him to walk that mile.**

Has God drawn you to obey Acts 2:38?

[Chong]

I do too, MamaB.

I had no idea about your tragic losses, as I don’t post too often anymore. I am so very sorry. You are absolutely right; God IS the answer.

God bless you, my FRiend.

[caww]

I can relate to that very well...only my loses were in a two year period....could barely come up for air!.... I would not have endured without the Lord by any means.

[metmom]

Top 10 Most Wicked Popes

http://listverse.com/2007/08/17/top-10-most-wicked-popes/

1. Liberius, reigned 352-66 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
2. Honorius I, reigned 625-638 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
3. Stephen VI, reigned 896-89 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
4. John XII, reigned 955-964 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
5. Benedict IX, reigned 1032-1048 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
6. Boniface VIII, reigned 1294-1303 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
7. Urban VI, reigned 1378-1389 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
8. Alexander VI, reigned 1492-1503 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
9. Leo X, reigned 1513-1521 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
10. Clement VII, reigned 1523-1524 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]

Top 10 Worst Popes in History

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-worst-popes-in-history.php

1. Pope Alexander VI (1431 – 1503)
2. Pope John XII (c. 937 – 964)
3. Pope Benedict IX (c. 1012 – 1065/85)
4. Pope Sergius III (? – 911)
5. Pope Stephen VI (? – 897)
6. Pope Julius III (1487 – 1555)
7. Pope Urban II (ca. 1035 – 1099)
8. Pope Clement VI (1291 – 1352)
9. Pope Leo X (1475 – 1521)
10. Pope Boniface VIII (c. 1235 – 1303)

YOUR pope kissing the koran. Fits right in with YOUR Catechism of the Catholic church.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P29.HTM

841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330

[metmom]

I don't know. Maybe one reason is becasue you and others attack Joel with such a mean spirit - vicious and rigid. Yet your evidence that he deserves such treatment is so paltry. Much of it boils down to a personal preference or disagreement with Joel.

It's not like you say, "I don't agree with Joel." That would be one thing. That could certainly be understandable as many among God's people don't agree with each other about a lot of stuff.

But if we disagree with Joel and give reasons for it, THEN we're rigid and vicious. Right?

[Mr Rogers]

“Peter says it SAVES us. Man says it doesn’t,...but it’s somehow important?!?!”

Peter says it saves us, but from what?

“Be saved from this perverse generation!”

“...when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you...”

Did the Flood justify Noah? Of course not! In what sense did the Flood “save” Noah, when to most it looks like the Flood threatened Noah?

Well, the Flood saved Noah from the perverse generation around him, separating him from the evil world he was in. “Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you...”

Water baptism is an important part of sanctification - our being made separate from the world around us. Salvation refers to BOTH justification and sanctification, so water baptism does offer us salvation - in the sense that it is involved in sanctification, which is part of salvation.

I’m sorry, but you are twisting scripture if you claim water baptism gives us life. Water baptism does not regenerate us, but it is a part of the sanctification - separation - process, as Peter clearly taught.

The blood cleanses us from sin. The water cleans us from the world, and dedicates our life to God.

See also:

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/v02-n10/baptism

[MamaB]

Wow. I had never seen that last picture. How can he believe that?

[MamaB]

It is an odd thing about the deaths. My mom’s dad died on 1/6/1926, my dad died on 1/6/1984, and my mom died on 1/6/2007. She would have been 103 on 4/26. She was an amazing Christian lady. God bless.

[CynicalBear]

>>You haven’t proven that Joel Osteen is a heretic or denies Jesus is the only way to heaven.<≤≤p> When asked if Jesus is the only way to heaven Osteen said "for me that's what I believe but for others I don't know". So he doesn't know if Jesus is the only way for all people. At least he won't publicly proclaim that Jesus is the only way period. That in effect is denying Jesus.

[CynicalBear]

>>Has God drawn you to obey Acts 2:38?<<

Of course. Now let me ask you, have you asked Jesus to be your personal savior?

[PapaNew]

But if we disagree with Joel and give reasons for it, THEN we're rigid and vicious. Right?

Of course not. It's taking your personal disagreements and distaste of Joel and turning into attacks on his character. Your attacks and accusations on Joel, calling him a heretic, the same way the Pharisees called Paul a heretic, and claims that he "denies Jesus" - those are vicious, mean, unfounded, and uncalled for.

I'm done here. Suffice it to say it is up to the accusers to prove their accusations and defamation of another by at least a preponderance of evidence. Even in a court of law an accused criminal is presumed innocent until proven guilty. And personal grudges that do not reach a legal issue do not even belong in court. Here, you have egregiously accused Joel of denying Jesus with paltry evidence and mostly on the basis of personal preference. And this against a brother in Christ. Despicable.

However, we all do despicable things. God's grace is greater than or sins and iniquities. He took all our sins and forgave all of us on the cross 2000 years ago. I know Joel forgives you (plural) and I forgive you. I know Joel has moved on, and so do I.