[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Instead of getting ready to burn her at the stake for saying "He told me", I would have probably asked her to clarify her remarks.

She's claiming divine revelation for her ecumenical crap. She's into new age mysticism and mumbo jumbo. She partners with Dominionists such as Joyce Meyers, or prosperity gimps like Joel Osteen, to get Christians to give up their "labels," like Protestant, Baptist, Presbyterian, Catholic, "we're all One church!".

This is Ted Cruz's church!

She's up the creek without the paddle. No going back for her.

[DrewsDad]

to get Christians to give up their "labels," like Protestant, Baptist, Presbyterian, Catholic, "we're all One church!".

As far as those that are doctrinally sound, are we not all one body of believers in Christ?

I found one website that labeled Billy Graham a false teacher alongside Beth Moore. Do you have a website that provides more details on Moore's heresy?

[Springfield Reformer]

Beth Moore is a Sunday school teacher at a megachurch.  I've gone to churches that had some problem people on the teaching staff.  The pastoral staff has the responsibility of oversight.  Ted just goes to church there.  You have not demonstrated your original assertion at all. Show us where Ted says he believes it is necessary for Christians to conquer earth before Christ can return. That's the dominionism I have for next door neighbors. We say hi when he mows the churchyard grass.  Does that make me a dominionist? I trow not.

BTW, I once went to a Southern Baptist church that tolerated masons. That was wrong of the pastoral staff to allow. But it didn't make me or anyone else a mason.  

So just as I said, the two major avenues of attack to make Ted into a dominionist are guilt by association, and category error, i.e., defining dominionism so broadly no decent, conservative Christian could escape the charge. Kind of like how the SPLC defames us routinely.  That link you provided, and the embedded link referring to the laying on of hands event in Iowa, has some great material to prove the latter point. As I read it, the authors believe you are probably a dominionist if you:

1)  Defend the religious liberty of civil servants who refuse to support gay marriage
2)  Accuse people who advocate for abortion of being satanists
3)  Argue that the Constitution and the legal system of our country can trace their roots to Old Testament law, i.e., we are a Judeo-Christian nation
4)  Worry that the judgment of God could come to our country in the form of violence against evildoers
5)  Argue that the principle of separation of church and state is an incorrect understanding of the Constitution
6)  Propose that the gay agenda is more a tool of Marxist disdain for the family than it is about sexual preferences

I could go on and on.  Not one of those "proofs" demonstrate dominionism.  Not even close. In fact, you might find out that the founder of this site concurs with all those "proofs."  Jim, are you a dominionist? No need to answer.  We all know you aren't. At least most of us do. I hope.

Peace,

SR