Timmy Brister  on January 11th, 2007

I don’t know what to say either man. There is nothing like hearing it from the horse’s mouth. I can’t help but think about Paul’s admonition to preach the Word because the time would come when people would turn aside from the truth to myths because of their itching ears. Indeed, they would accumulate for themselves teachers according to their own liking, and here are the answers to America’s itching ears. The problem is we have left them without the truth.

trent.hunter  on January 11th, 2007

When I listen to Osteen talk with Larry King, I can’t help but believe we have the real man coming out here. He speaks with confidence to his people but cannot even articulate the simples aspects of the gospel – this, of course, is in wild contrast to the Apostle Paul’s boldness and clarity. May we, like him, be unashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ, with all of its implications (Rom. 1:16).

Ben C.  on January 11th, 2007

Osteen is nuts.

Osteen on Larry King — A different perspective « RCS Web Solutions  on January 11th, 2007

[...] Osteen on Larry King — A different perspective This post is in response to a friend’s blog post . [...]

Randy  on January 11th, 2007

If trackbacks only worked…

My response can be found here:

http://rcswebsolutions.wordpress.com/

Just remember how the Lord tells us to deal with people who we disagree with:

And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.

I would respectfully point out that Ben’s comment about Osteen is just as unbiblical as the things Osteen said on Larry King. It is easier to see the speck in the other’s eye than it is to see the log in our own.

For what it is worth, while I think Osteen is wrong on many things, he has a gentleness and kindness about him that are very biblical. He does a great job of encouraging people. Does he always do it with biblical truth, unfortunately I think many times the answer is probably “no.” However, that doesn’t mean we can’t learn something from him.

Lets remember that we have all had times in our life when we have been less than bold in our witness for Christ. Mr. Osteen has the unfortunate experience of having his shortcomings recorded, debated, and talked about over and over again. It seems a lot of us are willing to pick up and cast the first stone. We should make a better effort at being theologically modest and less antagonistic. Is the gospel offensive to some? Absolutely. Does that give us license to be smug about it? Absolutely not.

He also posted a follow-up letter on his church’s website in which he stated clearly his belief in the biblical gospel and asked for forgiveness. What more can a man do?

His letter of apology has since been removed from the church’s website. However, it can still be found in the internet archives.

Ben C.  on January 11th, 2007

Randy,

Totally understood. I probably fall short in being a little to blunt sometimes. I honestly think he deserves the comment though. Someone with no Biblical background (other than growing up in a Word of Faith church, which is hardly Biblical) and a degree in marketing (his teachers must be so proud of him since he’s made so much money marketing God) and can’t even stand up for Christianity on Larry King Live shouldn’t be the most influential person. It’s just wrong.

I’m ok with the log in my eye. I know my problems and I’m dealing with them. If I thought Osteen could even see the log/speck in his eye I probably wouldn’t say anything, but I think satan has a grasp on him. Matthew 7:15.

Bottom line: I think it’s great he’s brought people to the Lord. No question about that. I just worry about his witness and am fearful for the day when he fails or is called out as a false witness for Christ and the backlash to the Christian community as a whole because he is such a public figure now.

Am I making sense? I don’t feel like I have the gift of words.

trent.hunter  on January 11th, 2007

Hey Gentlemen!

I was pleased to see a little back and forth here on the blog. Of course, as the host, it is fitting that I chime in. But first, because the blogosphere can be impersonal and because people are more than what they post, allow me to introduce friends -

Randy, meet Ben! Ben is a long time friend in the Lord who welcomed me into a friendship shortly after I was invited to church for the first time back in 8th grade. He was one of the first people to clearly explain the gospel to me. We reconnected after about 6 years just this week. I thank God for him.

Ben, meet Randy! Randy is a good friend of mine here at Southern Seminary. I met him through our common interest in web design and Randy and I collaborate on web projects from time to time. I appreciate Randy’s talent as a web programmer and his devotion as a husband and father.

On to the topic at hand. A few thoughts,

Ben,

In fairness to Mr. Osteen, he is aware of the speck in his own eye and did confess a clear commitment to the exclusivity of the gospel at his church following a firestorm of criticism by his church and even his closest followers. For this he is to be commended and God is to be praised. My post really should have included a link to this confession. Concerning Osteen’s placement as the most influential Christian, we might remember that history is full of influential men without formal theological education – DL Moody, for example. Along these lines, I think of Acts 3:13, “Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated, common men, they were astonished. And they recognized that they had been with Jesus.” So, education has little to do with gospel clarity and I see no reason why a man without theological training could not be the most influential Christian. But it should not surprise us that the most influential Christian of our times is at the same time not altogether Bible saturated or gospel centered. Osteen said for himself, “I just try to teach practical principles. I don’t even bring the Scripture in till the end of my sermon and I don’t feel bad about that.” I join you with disappointment over what these statistics must mean and thank God that your concern for the gospel’s clarity has not faded since you shared it with me back in 1994. Thanks for posting your thoughts, friend.

Randy,

I am thankful for the balance you are concerned to strike. I cannot help but think of Peter in watching these videos. I think it’s fair to say that Jesus’ reaction to Peter’s denial would have been closer to deep sorrow instead of sarcasm. But while a call to seriousness or sadness over sarcasm and silliness would have been appropriate, in my estimation, a call to “theological modesty” instead of sarcasm, in this instance, misses the mark. The tragedy of millions of people who were confused about the gospel is a serious matter indeed! I’m sure you agree brother. And while Jesus has required us to take the log out of our own eyes, as you have reminded us, we are nonetheless required to address the speck in another’s – and on gospel matters the New Testament bears this out. The quarreling about which the Apostle speaks in 2 Timothy 2:24 refers to quarrels about matters that should not divide believers – but matters of gospel are matters that matter! Gospel matters are not specks – they are not logs – they are forests! But I know that you love the gospel, brother, and praise God for your own seriousness about the cross. Who after all has “the glory of God in Christ” in the tag line for their web-programmers blog? It is this seriousness that gives way to your concern that we embrace Mr. Osteen after his confession and I hear it. May God continue to be praised in your work, in your family and in your life. Welcome to the blogosphere and thank you for posting! Time to work on Yard Birds!!!

In Closing,

Gentlemen, let’s be reminded of our example in Peter, who after rejecting Christ, lived and died for his sake. Osteen’s confession and request for forgiveness does lay a demand on us all and I thank Randy for pointing us to Dr. Mohler’s example, when Dr. Mohler wrote,

Mr. Osteen’s statement is encouraging on several fronts. First, it is encouraging to know that the constituency of Joel Osteen Ministries was so upset about the interview. Second, Mr. Osteen’s statement includes a clear and unambiguous affirmation of the exclusivity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Third, the timeliness of the statement underlines the importance of the issues at stake. Fourth, Mr. Osteen’s apology is free from the evasions typical of the pseudo-apologies so often issued to the public. He did not say that “statements were made,” but instead acknowledged that he had failed to communicate Gospel truth. The humility and honesty of the statement serve to fortify its authenticity.

This is a reminder to all of us who appear in the media. Statements made to an audience of millions are difficult to retract and are often impossible to correct. When Mr. Osteen writes, “I hope that you accept my deepest apology and see it in your heart to extend to me grace and forgiveness,” the only proper response is to extend the very forgiveness for which he asks — and with equal humility. Other concerns can wait for another day.

With this in mind, let us be always mindful, that while witness is not only words, witness is never less than words. If we fail in what we say about the gospel, we have just provided a false explanation to everything else we attempt in Christ’s name! All of the kindness and encouragement in any name but Christ, the Christ who is the Way the Truth and the Life, is kindness and encouragement in the wrong direction. When put on the hotseat for the foundational truths of the gospel I hope and pray that each of us would maintain a clear head and a confident heart to display the goodness and the truth that Jesus died to save sinners because sinners – all sinners- deserve the eternal pain of hell.

And let’s remember, the cross invites strange looks, for the cross is foolishness to those who do not believe. But the cross is what they need. Let’s take our lead from Paul, who spoke confidently, constantly and clearly about the cross;

Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 1 Corinthians 1:20-25

Randy  on January 12th, 2007

“But while a call to seriousness or sadness over sarcasm and silliness would have been appropriate, in my estimation, a call to “theological modesty” instead of sarcasm, in this instance, misses the mark. The tragedy of millions of people who were confused about the gospel is a serious matter indeed!”

I guess then that maybe it would be helpful for you to explain the purpose of the post. The way I read it, Osteen was given the award talked about previously and you were posting the YouTube videos as reason why the award was erroneous. You were basically saying, “Look at how this guy responded on Larry King, there is no way he should be America’s Most Influential Christian.” Now, that could be the wrong impression since you “didn’t know what to say” about the videos .

In my opinion, the Larry King interview should be dead in the water for any Christian commenting on Mr. Osteen. He has explicitly asked for forgiveness on this issue. To forgive someone for a sin means:

1) I will not dwell on the sin myself (i.e. in thought)
2) I will not hold the sin against you in any way
3) I will not talk to others about your sin (in person or written in a public forum)

Therefore, any Christian who wants to rehash this event is, in essence, not extending the forgiveness that Mr. Osteen has asked for. Dr. Mohler says:

“When Mr. Osteen writes, “I hope that you accept my deepest apology and see it in your heart to extend to me grace and forgiveness,” the only proper response is to extend the very forgiveness for which he asks — and with equal humility.”

Hence my call to theological modesty. We should extend the forgiveness requested, recalling how many times that we have failed to share the gospel and how many times our Lord has forgiven us. Knowing that we too, despite the best biblical training, are certainly wrong on many accounts.

Now, as to “the tragedy of the millions of people who were confused about the gospel,” I agree that this is a tragedy. However, the scope of Mr. Osteen’s sin should not confuse us into thinking he is exempt from wholehearted forgiveness. The post, as written, doesn’t help a single one of those million viewer’s who don’t understand the gospel. It simply rehashes Mr. Osteen’s sin (IMO).

I agree that there are reason’s why Mr. Osteen should not be America’s Most Influential Christian. There are also reasons why he should (it reveals what America is looking for in it’s pastors). I agree that there are many things that Mr. Osteen does that are biblically and theologically detrimental to the Christian faith. However, as Dr. Mohler said:

“[We must extend forgiveness.] Other concerns can wait for another day.”

Randy  on January 12th, 2007

Ben,

Nice to meet you by the way.

“Am I making sense? I don’t feel like I have the gift of words.”

I understand your concern. However, I would still say that your insistence on calling him “nuts” doesn’t help anyone, least of all Mr. Osteen.

“[speak] the truth in love” Eph. 4:15

“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.” Eph. 4:29

“And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness.” 2 Tim. 2:24

Please consider how God would have us respond to those with whom we disagree.

Blessings brother!

trent.hunter  on January 12th, 2007

Randy,

I am better understanding your point! The term Theological modesty” seems to imply an acceptance of one’s theology. But, I take it, you mean to encouage us to accept a man who has recanted of his compromising theological statements. Though I am not sure that forgiveness entails forgetting (we still read about and learn from Peter’s denial of Christ), it does ential fairness – and in fairness to Mr. Osteen, as I mentioned in my words to Ben, it would have been right and good to frame those videos within the larger context of his confession and provide some indication as to my purpose in noting his recent award – to provide an observation as to who has the attention and the affection of American evangelicals and what that might mean. Surely Osteen preaches the gospel at home, but his painful ambiguity was revealing, and a wake up call to all of us. In my opinion, it is worth remembering – but in application of your encouragement from Scripture, it is not worth mentioning without remembering his confession. As I mentioned earlier, Dr. Mohler is our example in this and so many similar matters. My inclusion of his letter was to affirm my agreement with his words. I remember his reaction to Mr. Osteen following the show, as well as his response following his confession and being encouraged my the pattern he set in both instances. Thanks for your thoughtfulness, brother!

Ben C.  on January 12th, 2007

Randy,

Nice to meet you too! Any friend of Trent’s is a friend of mine. He has such good taste in people (we both should know, right?? ) My comment about Osteen being nuts was flippant and uncaring. I was really just trying to be funny (I’m really a funny guy… at least I think I am!), but I probably should have explained myself further and using different words.

You know, I think this is something that I’m going to have to agree to disagree with you guys on. I do not feel that his apology is from the heart. I feel it is from his pockets. My mom always said, “If you were really sorry, you wouldn’t have done it in the first place.” This was only said about things we knew to be wrong in the first place, as Mr. Osteen should have known he was basically denying Christ when he dodged Larry King’s question. I will, however, make a commitment to pray for him and his church and pray that the Lord will use him to bring many to His Kingdom.

I guess this could bring up one interesting question that I’m going to have to think about. If Joel Osteen brings one person to the Lord, but leads thousands astray, is it all worth it? (and I we don’t have to single out Mr. Osteen, it could be anyone). Maybe I’ll work on a blog post of my own for that one. I’ve got a really good ethical question to post today though, so it will have to come at a later time.

God be with you both!

trent.hunter  on January 12th, 2007

Ben,

Your perception of Osteen’s heart condition may be right – but who can know? It is God who judges the “thoughts and intentions of the heart” by means of his word and it is before God that “no creature is hidden” and to whom “we must give account” (Hebrews 4:12, 13). All we have to go on, unless we are to claim omniscience, is what he has said – and his confession was plain and it was specific. Now, fruit does bear witness to what’s really going on in the heart – but as far as I can see, his health and wealth bent does not rule out his sincerety in affirming the gospel, just another misunderstanding as to the nature of the gospel’s benefits and demands on the Christian.

In my estimation, and this is all the speculation with which I am comfortable, Osteen is genuinely unclear as to the unavoidable implications of the gospel. This reality, coupled with a misplaced desire to be liked by his hearers, gave way to his blindness before a home run opportunity to talk about the meaning of the cross with his national audience. He was likely thinking more about man than he was God – and, I think, more than money.

Our prayer might be that the Lord would use the whole experience as a wake up call for Pastor Osteen and that he would take it as an opportunity to think through just how to honor Christ in future similar public appearances. We will see him again on TV. Let’s pray he is clear and uncompromising. May Pastor Osteen and each of us put the opinion of God before the opinion of people, for the sake of the gospel of Jesus Christ!

Thanks for getting the discussion rolling Randy.

Ben C.  on January 12th, 2007

Trent,

You are right. We can not know his heart, that’s why I said I “feel” his apology was not from the heart. It’s just a feeling I get whenever I see him on TV, or read a story about him, or hear one of his sermons (I’ve listened to a few over the last 2-3 years). I just get a cold, dark, disingenuous feeling from him. When I saw him on the 10 most fascinating people of 2006 I actually shivered. Only God will be the true judge of him, but God gave us discernment and right now my heart tells me to beware. I will remain wary of him, but will definitely keep him in my prayers. He can do a lot of good with the “power” he has, but he can also do a lot of damage to Christianity as a whole, unfortunately.

Yes Randy, great discussion. I’m enjoying it immensely!

Drew  on January 17th, 2007

Hey Ben!
-trent’s little brother

zvester  on January 17th, 2007

Thanks for the post. I remember hearing this on Larry King, but tried to forget it!

Ben C.  on January 18th, 2007

Hey Drew! It’s been a LONG time! I remember how you and Trent used to fight all the time. Looks like (based on the HunterHome blog) you guys get along great now! My brother and I have a similar relationship now that we’ve grown older too. Congrats on marriage too! It’s got to be the best thing God ever invented.

Adam Utecht  on January 19th, 2007

Here I am late in the game on this blog. I will enter my thoughts anyway. Where do I begin? My bent is toward anger, sarcasm and retaliation of words when I see this video. Then my heart changes a bit when read Mr. Osteen’s apology letter. It exposes the judmentalism in my own heart, and I repent. However, I feel that my feelings are not wholly wrong. Part of my angry response is, I believer, righteous anger. I sincerely think that my feelings are due to the sadness deep within me that people have been led astray by the failures of this man. It is true that to whom much has been given, much will be required. It is also true that we who are pastors and/or teachers must be sober-minded and fearful, for “you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness” (Jas 3:1). This is an exhortation to us as much as to Mr. Osteen.

We must forgive and we cannot judge the heart of this man, because, we do not know it as God does. But I share in Ben’s cautions. I saw the interview with Barbara Walters on the recent “Heaven” program around Christmas on ABC. Mr. Osteen did not clearly articulate the gospel in this interview either. She asked him about sin and judgment and hell and why he does not preach about these things. I cannot quote exactly his response, but it was somewhere along the lines of “I don’t like to focus on the negatives” and “We want to encourage people and not bog them down with such matters.” If someone has the exact transcript, feel free to post it. Sin is a central issue that CANNOT be avoided or neglected. Without the clear preaching of mankind’s desperate state (Rom. 6:23a), there is no need for “the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23b). Without the awareness of sin, we will never come to the cross of Jesus Christ. If I am correct, Mr. Osteen never talks about this to his audiences. The problem may not simply be avoiding the preaching of the EXLUSIVITY of the Gospel, but the neglect of preaching ANY Gospel at all.

My desire is not to throw mud at this man, for I have many deficiencies. If I am ever on Larry King (highly unlikely), I will also feel the pressure of pleasing man and not God. I do pray that I will in every situation be bold in proclaiming the Gospel of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

trent.hunter  on January 19th, 2007

Well stated, Adam. Miss you man!

Better than a transcript – here’s the video!

Ben C.  on January 22nd, 2007

I was reminded this weekend of another thing Mr. Osteen says… He says that he preaches life application and not doctrine. In my opinion, how can you understand the application if you do not know the doctrine. This is a dangerous path he’s going down.

Adam, I hope you get on Larry King Live someday! hahaha! I’m sure there is a lot of pressure on that show. There would probably be a huge battle between good and evil inside a man before going on there to speak in front of the World.

trent.hunter  on January 22nd, 2007

Application is weightless without doctrine. And doctrine without application isn’t honored. A read across the New Testament bears this out. The epistles are marked by this relationship. The book of Ephesians, for example, explores the glory of God, the sinfulness of humankind, God’s plan for our salvation in Christ, etc. The second half of the book is an application of that doctrine to life and relationships. I love it! That to say, you hit the nail on the head, Ben.

Ben C.  on January 22nd, 2007

Yay! I’m studying Ephesians right now, so that is what led me to those remarks. It’s good to know I’m already getting the major points.

Dan Barnett  on January 22nd, 2007

I know I’m really late on this. I agree with you guys about Osteen being off-base on this stuff. I am a little offended by one comment, that I may take out of context on the offense, and if I do let me know. I forget which one of you said it, but you said that A man with no degree shouldn’t be the most influencial christian. I understand you said more in that sentence, and it was directed at Joel. I am troubled that so many people require a biblical degree of some sort to be an effective minister, christian, pastor, etc. I would challenge you to look at yourself, all of you, and see if you deep down really think that, whether you deny the thought out loud. I don’t want to accuse you of saying what I have paraphrased. I’m really just pointing out a concern. I agree that Osteen shouldn’t be the mot influencial christian, but he is. That’s the sad part. Whether he knows Christ or not, we must pray for him and trust God to be in control. Jesus said the we would be his witnesses to the world. It wasn’t a choice. What scares me is, not only Joel, but other highly influencial christians with money in their name, are being Christ’s witnesses. We either direct others to Him or away, and these men are not directing people toward the true Christ. All that said, I would challenge you guys, to examine your mind and see if you hold that belief that a man, not educated by a christan school can be the most influencial christian.

Dan Barnett  on January 23rd, 2007

I would like to add….after my dial-up finally loaded the utube vids, This is frightening. What’s sad is I think this man and others like seriously believe this stuff. Sure the Hindus are serious about their faith, but it’s placed on false idols. I find this very much a reflection of a dangerous post-modern, relative belief.

Ben C.  on January 23rd, 2007

Dan,

I’m going to stand by my comment on the degree thing. The Bible teaches us that we are all ministers, educated or not, but a pastor, a leader, should have some sort of formal training. Would you allow me to remove perform brain surgery on you? (ps. I’m not a brain surgeon) I think it’s a sign of respect not only to God, but to the people a pastor is leading. You’re telling them, “Listen, I want to be the one to lead you, God has called me to do that, so out of respect for Him, I will learn as much as I can about how to interpret the Bible, the history behind it, etc… so that we can understand and apply a document that was written 2,000 years ago to our lives today.” It’s actually very dangerous to let a man preach when he doesn’t know what he’s doing. If you could go to my in-law’s church you would know what I’m talking about (or maybe watching some of Osteen’s sermons would show you) because that guy has no clue and no training.

That being said, the Holy Spirit leads. I won’t deny that. I could be called to leave my job today and preach to people in China or something. I’m just saying that if you are called to be in that capacity. Wouldn’t you want to be the best you can be? For the glory of the Lord? Our church just lost a pastor 2 years ago because he decided that he needed to get his Dr., he already went to college for 4 years, already got his M-Div, but still he sought the Word and strived to know more and more.

Maybe it’s just a personal choice for me, maybe I’m an elitist, maybe I’m wrong, but I think someone who’s going to lead me, someone who I want to ask questions of, etc… should have more formal training than I have.

Dan Barnett  on January 23rd, 2007

Ben, I agree with you whole-heartedly on a leader wanting to learn more and be the best he can be. I’m behind you whether this response says it differently and sounds as I’ve missed your point. I’ll be honest, at this point in my life compared to this point in yours, if you and I got into a debate, you can out-doctrine me hands down. I do know, however, a few men who are pastors and don’t have a college degree. These men are some of the wisest and Godliest men I have ever known. How did they get there? They had men over them in the church pouring into them, and they disciplined themselves to learning all they could. One of them spent a full career as a horseshoer. I’m encouraged to hear your pastor wants to further his professional studies. I won’t comment on him because I don’t know anything about the story, though I could speculate and make assumptions to disagree with how he goes about it, but I won’t because I would be dead wrong to. I’m more encouraged to know that there are pastors like him who have the time and resources to be able to go to school. I feel the same for those of you who have been blessed with the finances somehow to go. Every bit of training thus far for me has been through men in my life. Unfortunately for years I ignored and am fighting to gain more wisdom and knowledge. I won’t sit here and say your wrong. That would open the two of us to a debate. If that occurred I would lose more than an argument. You could find things to prove me wrong, thus I would not learn but be defeated. I trust that this wouldn’t be your intention in such a debate, but for what I’ve put my heart through, it would hurt too much to know nothing more than I’m wrong as far as I can tell. So I will stand by my opinion for now, and I give your my word that I will search for truth whether different or not from what I believe now. Thanks for your kind and gracious response. You don’t get those much in the church anymore. “Press On.”-Philippians

trent.hunter  on January 24th, 2007

Gentlemen, good discussion.

One exchange from the Barbra Walters’ interview is worth reflection as we discuss the nature and necessity of theological education for the pastor.

Walters: “You have no theological training, and yet here you are telling people how to live their lives. I mean, where do you get that authority? Where do you get the nerve?”

Osteen: “I guess I just get it from God. I don’t know it just comes out of me.”

The answer to where a pastor gets his authority is indeed “from God,” but the authority a pastor has from God is never to be understood as being separate from the God’s Word. That Osteen did not make a B-Line to the Scriptures as the grounds for his authority to teach reflects the same philosophy of ministry expressed in his interview with King; “What I just try to do is teach practical principles. I may  not bring the Scriptures in until the end of my sermon, and I don’t feel bad about that.” But Paul did not tell Timothy in 2 Timothy 4 to “teach practical principles” an save the Scriptures “until the end,” but to “preach the word.” The word is that which is authoritative and the word is the sum and substance of our preaching. Principles follow.

Randy  on January 24th, 2007

You gotta love it when people start quoting themselves

I think Trent has laid out Scripture’s position on this topic pretty well for a short blog comment.

Now, quit yappin’ and get my Yardbirds work done…

trent.hunter  on January 24th, 2007

Allow me to restate my previous response to Ben’s original comment,

Concerning Osteen’s placement as the most influential Christian, we might remember that history is full of influential men without formal theological education – DL Moody, for example. Along these lines, I think of Acts 3:13, “Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated, common men, they were astonished. And they recognized that they had been with Jesus.”

The wonder of the gospel is precisely that it DOESN’T require formal training for its apprehension or dissemination. God has so designed our salvation that education is not a prerequisite to being saved or to ministering the gospel for the salvation of others.

Allow me to propose the criteria of “Gospel faithfulness” over, though not against, the criteria of “formal education.” That is, this is the criteria which we might hope the most influential Christian to meet. 2 Timothy 1:15 is clear enough, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” So, we ought to expect diligence out our leaders, discipline, a knowledge of and love for the Scriptures – but formal education, I think, while an important means to competence is not a required means for competence in the pastoral task of teaching and preaching. As we all know, formal training doesn’t necessarily lead to a qualified person – morally or theologically! A passion for the glory of God reflected in a moral character that reflects the nature of God is tantamount! That’s what I might call “gospel faithfulness.” So, while the Apostles were “uneducated men,” they knew and were transformed by Christ – and were, thus, fully equipped for the the task of gospel ministry. They gave their lives for the gospel and their influence is felt to this day. These uneducated men are among the most influential of human history.

The issue we all have with Pastor Osteen is having to do with the clarity of the gospel. Were Pastor Osteen clear on this matter, no one would be complaining about his lack of education.

trent.hunter  on January 24th, 2007

Now that’s kinda funny. Here I looked at the comment I just posted and thought, “I really ought to break that up into two.” So I chopped it up and by the time I posted, Randy responds and the very text to which he is responding now appears below his response. Yardbirds, here I come. So, for the record, Randy’s response was to the analysis that immediately followed his last comment.

Ben C.  on January 24th, 2007

Guys,

I hear your points. I was thinking about it a lot last night and had a discussion with my wife about it. We both agreed that for us, we would prefer to have a pastor that was formally educated, but that you guys are completely right, it does not take a formally educated man to lead. It just takes the grace of God and that man’s love for God and his gift from God to understand text and be ablet to use it to bring others to the Kingdom of Heaven. (was that a run-on sentence?) It’s hard sometimes because we (and by we, I mean me) want to put limits on God’s power, but if I say that a man without formal education can’t be a pastor, or I would never go to a church with a pastor that didn’t have a degree, then I’m saying that I can’t trust that God would give someone the natural wisdom and authority to preach, teach and pastor a great church. I would definitely want to do some checking into what the church believes doctrinally and listen to the pastor preach a few times, but I think we would all do that of any church whether or not the pastor was formally educated or not.

Trent, glad you have this site man. I think Dan is right that it’s hard to get into a good discussion with Christians without being spiteful or mean anymore. That’s truly sad. I’m pretty easy going (but I am opinionated), so you really could say anything to me and I probably wouldn’t even know you were insluting/making fun of me.

On a side note… And maybe you could do a blog entry on this Trent… I just met an alumnus from my school who’s looking for a church here and she told me she’s “Egalatarian” (sp?). I had never heard of that before! What are your thoughts? It’s something about men and women being equals in the church or something. I haven’t had much time to dig into it yet. Very touch issue I would imagine.

Randy  on January 24th, 2007

Ben,

Concerning Egalitarianism, I believe it to be an unbiblical position. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood has a lot of material on this topic and most of it is free:

http://www.cbmw.org/

I would recommend that you start with their 50 crucial questions:

http://www.cbmw.org/questions/

and then take a look at their free online books:

http://www.cbmw.org/resources/books.php

Particularly, “Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood” by Wayne Grudem (it is at the top of the list of free online books)

trent.hunter  on January 24th, 2007

Ben,

Well, I’d have agree with you. I would lean toward a church with a pastor who has received formal training. Just because the Peter was “uneducated,” doesn’t make a lack of education a criteria for faithfulness. It is just to say that education isn’t everything.

As far as Egalitarianism, Ben – this is huge! The feminist movement within our culture has a counterpart within the church. Its aim is to flatten gender roles within the church and family. You might visit the site for the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood at http://www.cbmw.com. Also, the first mp3 at http://www.cbmw.org/resources/audio.php might be of help. It is an interview with Wayne Grudem about his new book, “Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?” Basically, he exposes the hermeneutical tricks pulled by those who attempt to flatten gender roles and shows their outcome – such principles of Biblical interpretation will lead toward a functional denial of the authority of Scripture. A kind of creative interpretation that has characterized the liberal movement within mainline protestantism (ie. The Episcopalian church and it’s ordination of homosexual bishops). I would highly recommend Grudem’s book to you for a good fly over the land of the topic, it’s importance and it’s implications.

Ben C.  on January 24th, 2007

Thanks guys! I’m going to check this stuff out. I couldn’t believe it when I read some blurbs about it when I spent a few minutes checking it out after I got the email from her asking for help finding a church. It seemed un-Biblical to me, but was too unfamiliar with it to take a stance and be able to back it up!

Dan Barnett  on January 24th, 2007

Hey guys. Thanks for the encouraging support of the discussion between Ben and myself. Ben, I too, as well as probably many Christians, would lean toward a church where the pastor is schooled. I just wanted to raise a concern as far as the degree thing went. I respect you greatly for being open and humble. I also know you weren’t pointing at this topic directly in your comments on Osteen. Your comment just triggered a concern I’ve had with some people. I appreciate this site as well. You guys are really just kind in your arguments and open to criticism. Thanks guys.

Ben C.  on January 25th, 2007

So, I checked out a lot of those “50 questions”. I can’t deny the scripture, but some of it sounds pretty harsh… Like how a woman can not speak in church and should ask her husband any question, etc… Does that mean my wife shouldn’t talk in our Sunday school class? She should wait until the end and then ask me questions when we get home? If we take the scripture literally it appears to be yes. Maybe I missed some of the questions and answers (I’ll finish them today), but maybe someone here has some input?

trent.hunter  on January 25th, 2007

Hmm… let me go read them.

trent.hunter  on January 25th, 2007

Ben go here for a clarification. I think you misread the question or the answer.

Ben C.  on January 25th, 2007

Exactly what I was looking for! That’s what I get for stopping at number 21 or something like that… Been busy here at work today (which is unusual… I have a really boring job), so I hadn’t had time to read the rest! Thanks Trent! That will teach me to post something before I finish it

trent.hunter  on January 25th, 2007

I love it. I am probably due for a post on this issue.

Above All Things » Blog Archive » Rick Warren & Sam Harris  on April 2nd, 2007

[...] in his recent conversation with Sam Harris, hosted by NewsWeek, does not bow to itching ears (see here). Every Christian should consider the questions posed by this interviewer and be ready with an [...]