Four months...

no sect as such decides…

He chooses his souls,

sects (=denominations, calvins, free willers, *name-your-own) do not.
 
there’s “blessedAnomaly-ism”
At least what I teach is believed by many out there. I may not completely fall into a denomination, but rather see truth in many and hold belief in a slightly more eclectic manner. My essentials are the essentials of the Christian church.

You are the only one of perhaps a handful that believe what you have shown here. You espouse cultic behaviors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mik
Ted how do you know it's not this....Jesus said if ones won't receive your words shake the dust off your feet and move on? Why circle the wagons over and over and over again talking about the same material when they can go on to new people? Very presumptuous to say something is dead because all you hear is crickets. Seems like you miss all the people of whom you disagree with. Maybe you're feeling like Tom Hanks in the movie "Cast Away"? Or maybe like the man in the Twilight Zone, "The Lonely"??? You can get the radio show of that on You Tube a great story and then maybe you can tell us if that's what you're feeling. :)

I think you miss the meaning of Ted's post... WOF in this forum thought they could outlast the faithless critics. Ted posts that to remind them that they lost...

Personally, I don't care if they ever come back. I use this forum as my own playground as well as occasionally posting about the unrepentant doctrines of the movement. I don't mind saying that this forum has caused many WOF to leave the movement and others to modify their doctrines knowing what has been and is being taught is wrong.
 
I think you miss the meaning of Ted's post... WOF in this forum thought they could outlast the faithless critics. Ted posts that to remind them that they lost...
When was "outlast[ing] the faithless [sic] critics" ever a thing? Who made that the standard for this forum?

Personally, I don't care if they ever come back. I use this forum as my own playground as well as occasionally posting about the unrepentant doctrines of the movement. I don't mind saying that this forum has caused many WOF to leave the movement and others to modify their doctrines knowing what has been and is being taught is wrong.
My wife would put Dollar and Cope on the TV, and I would laugh at some of their offerings. She would get mad at me. They always knew more because, well, I guess they had a TV show and I didn't. It's the same position she took with our WoF pastor. I left each service dismantling his sermon, and she would get mad at me. He had a local TV show and would appear on TBN, Daystar and once on CBN's Pat Robertson show. So, I guess, he was smarter. Until we were one of three picked to be on that Pat Robertson show (via an into video for pastor) and she mentioned to him "Anything to help you out a bit." He responded: "Oh, I don't need your help. I'm ok." :rolleyes: She lost trust in him that day.

But she never transferred my truths about him over to the TV preachers. Then she found Andrew Wommack and that cost her her life.

I was never fully WoF, but I shouldered up to them for a while - critical, but still listening. They wore on me over time. I'm sure that this forum gave me food for thought. I'm certain of that.

I don't think you have any basis to say "many
the movement" because of CARM. Perhaps you know of one. I know of none. I know of a couple who moved on and returned elsewhere for a post or two.

As for "modify[ing] their doctrines," well, I hope so. Everyone should be modifying their doctrines. You have, at least in eschatology doctrines. We all have, hopefully. Because, IMHO, nobody is completely right. Nobody is without flaw in their doctrines. And no church or denomination has it 100% correct. They are all led by men, and men are flawed.

I'm convinced that my earlier flaw, when I shouldered up to WoF, was that I assumed that I had to be in a "denomination." Something organized as such. But I've learned that trying to be in a denomination or a movement only makes you subject to that groups errors, for you feel you have to accept, espouse and preach the whole line of teaching that they teach. Oh, and everyone will say "no, I teach the Bible; I learn from the Bible; if my leader contradicts the Bible, the Bible wins." But then I see these same people finding reason to hunker down under the very teaching that was questioned and becoming one of "them," thinking that this is following Christ. As opposed to one in Christ.

In that, I think that most of the people I have met here at CARM -- most, there are a few exceptions -- truly have a heart for Christ. But they have, as we all do, flaws in how to actually get under his wing. We are all flawed, especially anyone who would intone "I'm better than that group." If one really thinks they have taken care of the log.... guess again.

Matthew 7:4-5a
Or how can you say[e] to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own?
5 You hypocrite!​
 
When was "outlast[ing] the faithless [sic] critics" ever a thing? Who made that the standard for this forum?


My wife would put Dollar and Cope on the TV, and I would laugh at some of their offerings. She would get mad at me. They always knew more because, well, I guess they had a TV show and I didn't. It's the same position she took with our WoF pastor. I left each service dismantling his sermon, and she would get mad at me. He had a local TV show and would appear on TBN, Daystar and once on CBN's Pat Robertson show. So, I guess, he was smarter. Until we were one of three picked to be on that Pat Robertson show (via an into video for pastor) and she mentioned to him "Anything to help you out a bit." He responded: "Oh, I don't need your help. I'm ok." :rolleyes: She lost trust in him that day.

But she never transferred my truths about him over to the TV preachers. Then she found Andrew Wommack and that cost her her life.

I was never fully WoF, but I shouldered up to them for a while - critical, but still listening. They wore on me over time. I'm sure that this forum gave me food for thought. I'm certain of that.

I don't think you have any basis to say "many
the movement" because of CARM. Perhaps you know of one. I know of none. I know of a couple who moved on and returned elsewhere for a post or two.

As for "modify[ing] their doctrines," well, I hope so. Everyone should be modifying their doctrines. You have, at least in eschatology doctrines. We all have, hopefully. Because, IMHO, nobody is completely right. Nobody is without flaw in their doctrines. And no church or denomination has it 100% correct. They are all led by men, and men are flawed.

I'm convinced that my earlier flaw, when I shouldered up to WoF, was that I assumed that I had to be in a "denomination." Something organized as such. But I've learned that trying to be in a denomination or a movement only makes you subject to that groups errors, for you feel you have to accept, espouse and preach the whole line of teaching that they teach. Oh, and everyone will say "no, I teach the Bible; I learn from the Bible; if my leader contradicts the Bible, the Bible wins." But then I see these same people finding reason to hunker down under the very teaching that was questioned and becoming one of "them," thinking that this is following Christ. As opposed to one in Christ.

In that, I think that most of the people I have met here at CARM -- most, there are a few exceptions -- truly have a heart for Christ. But they have, as we all do, flaws in how to actually get under his wing. We are all flawed, especially anyone who would intone "I'm better than that group." If one really thinks they have taken care of the log.... guess again.

Matthew 7:4-5a
Or how can you say[e] to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own?
5 You hypocrite!​

I appreciate your comments. And I agree that none of us has a perfect understanding of God's word. I am of the opinion that there are groups that are egregiously wrong and must be confronted. I am convinced that the Reformed have the best overall understanding of scripture. And perhaps, that has caused "silent" pride in their hearts.
 
I appreciate your comments. And I agree that none of us has a perfect understanding of God's word. I am of the opinion that there are groups that are egregiously wrong and must be confronted. I am convinced that the Reformed have the best overall understanding of scripture. And perhaps, that has caused "silent" pride in their hearts.
And I yours. Most choose a "position/denomination/movement." I gave up on that, realizing that everyone is wrong somewhere. I gave up on that, realizing that I will never find complete understanding of God's Word from a group, but rather will only gain understanding of that group, and indoctrination into that group.

I do agree that when someone espouses ideas that are simply egregiously wrong, they should be corrected, given a chance to repent, and if they don't then we wipe the dust from our feet and go on. I've given such correction to many a Mormon, and a few JW's. I've also found that any doctrinal teachings that are in need of a decoder ring are of little use -- and as such, while there are nuggets to learn from, they are just another man's arrogance being promulgated upon unsuspecting souls.

From all this, if we draw a Venn diagram of all Christian beliefs, that place where they all overlap (somewhere in there is where the essential beliefs reside), then we might have found the least wrong and likely most correct teachings. It's a good starting place, eh?

So I'll let scripture speak for scripture in pure, unhidden words, that don't need fancy decoding to understand. God does not need a glossator to make understanding for his words. I'll look to what the various groups say, and try my best to understand their bent for saying what they say. I'll take rebuke when the rebuke is intelligent and not just "because I said so," and when it agrees with the clear, pure, unhidden words of scripture. And I'll take all in to see what makes sense with the Word, without the decoder ring that you only get if you join their groups, and that makes clear sense after sincere prayer.
 
From all this, if we draw a Venn diagram of all Christian beliefs, that place where they all overlap (somewhere in there is where the essential beliefs reside), then we might have found the least wrong and likely most correct teachings. It's a good starting place, eh?
I've been saying something similar for decades, only to be rejected over and over by wof and others in this forum.

Here's my position:

If we take the Creeds, Confessions and Articles of Faith from the Christian church, where they agree and intersect you find the essentials of the faith. The rest is where nonessential and sectarian beliefs are found.

For instance, baptism is an essential doctrine of the Christian faith. The mode of baptism is sectarian. Sprinkle, dunk, pour..., babies, kids and adults..., are sectarian areas and nonessential doctrines.
 
I've been saying something similar for decades, only to be rejected over and over by wof and others in this forum.

Here's my position:

If we take the Creeds, Confessions and Articles of Faith from the Christian church, where they agree and intersect you find the essentials of the faith. The rest is where nonessential and sectarian beliefs are found.

For instance, baptism is an essential doctrine of the Christian faith. The mode of baptism is sectarian. Sprinkle, dunk, pour..., babies, kids and adults..., are sectarian areas and nonessential doctrines.
I'm fairly certain I've always agreed with this sentiment. Why would WoF reject it? On what tenant?
 
At least what I teach is believed by many out there. I may not completely fall into a denomination, but rather see truth in many and hold belief in a slightly more eclectic manner. My essentials are the essentials of the Christian church.

You are the only one of perhaps a handful that believe what you have shown here. You espouse cultic behaviors.
im grateful He is not eclectic... since His reality and essentials are not eclectic.

you don't know me and we never have actually spoken in an earnest caring dialogue,
that I can attest, so your opinion of me is but rumor mongering and gossip (ad hom)
and is to no effect.
 
And no substantial wof posts, and more importantly, no wofist. Just dried out wof bones getting kicked around for another month. Wof is dead.
Yeah...I apologize. I know y'all miss me. There's no one else force you to pretend that WoF is dead. I've had major disruptions happen since the beginning of a prolonged fast. Long story short, the local Christian school needs a bus driver, and I've been working on my CDL for over a month. The process has roadblocks, and I could use your prayrers.

Time consuming. But now I'm just a Van driver, and a study hall monitor, which means I'll have Thursdays and Fridays to browse and respond. I'm sure that's good news for y'all.
 
I think you miss the meaning of Ted's post... WOF in this forum thought they could outlast the faithless critics. Ted posts that to remind them that they lost...

Personally, I don't care if they ever come back. I use this forum as my own playground as well as occasionally posting about the unrepentant doctrines of the movement. I don't mind saying that this forum has caused many WOF to leave the movement and others to modify their doctrines knowing what has been and is being taught is wrong.
This is just critic's arrogance, Joe. Some left because the critics are obnoxious, and they moved on. There is not point to redundancy when your critique is static and recalcitrant.
 
This is just critic's arrogance, Joe. Some left because the critics are obnoxious, and they moved on. There is not point to redundancy when your critique is static and recalcitrant.
Many non-wofist left because of wof and friends being obnoxious and rude... like being call the Triumvirate, critic, unbeliever, and many other things. It has never been one sided..., except for the delusional pseudo-wofist that calls everyone that has ever mentioned something similar to wof as a wofist. There is no point to redundancy when your critic is static and recalcitrant... insisting on his fantasies as fact. ?
 
Many non-wofist left because of wof and friends being obnoxious and rude... like being call the Triumvirate, critic, unbeliever, and many other things.
Yes...so rude...so rude...

"Triumvirate..." when there were three of you hammering Jffee, a woman, because she was a woman and deciding what was and wasn't "orthodox".

"Critic" because that's what you do, critique, and what you come here for.

"Unbeliever..." Don't even remember who called you that, although, unbelief is a key contrast to the discussion of faith.

It has never been one sided..., except for the delusional pseudo-wofist that calls everyone that has ever mentioned something similar to wof as a wofist. There is no point to redundancy when your critic is static and recalcitrant... insisting on his fantasies as fact. ?
Hmmm..."Delusional...?" Yes, well, we know, at least, that WoF doesn't have a monopoly on rude and obnoxious. Thanks for pointing that out.

Since the Word of Faith principles lay a paradigm for sound biblical exegesis, it is not erroneous or presumptuous, as VW always pointed out, to highlight those well-known teachers and scholars throughout history who used the WoF paradigm in biblical interpretation. I know you hate that, but WoF, like the Charismatic phenomena, was never one-time-on and gone.
 
Yes...so rude...so rude...

"Triumvirate..." when there were three of you hammering Jffee, a woman, because she was a woman and deciding what was and wasn't "orthodox".

"Critic" because that's what you do, critique, and what you come here for.

"Unbeliever..." Don't even remember who called you that, although, unbelief is a key contrast to the discussion of faith.

Hmmm..."Delusional...?" Yes, well, we know, at least, that WoF doesn't have a monopoly on rude and obnoxious. Thanks for pointing that out.

Since the Word of Faith principles lay a paradigm for sound biblical exegesis, it is not erroneous or presumptuous, as VW always pointed out, to highlight those well-known teachers and scholars throughout history who used the WoF paradigm in biblical interpretation. I know you hate that, but WoF, like the Charismatic phenomena, was never one-time-on and gone.
i for one would never hammer you..neither would I judge you
i hope you did not mean me...
 
i for one would never hammer you..neither would I judge you
i hope you did not mean me...
In what context? These are conversations and perceived hurts that were "inflicted" in the golden age of Christian Forums, when Matthew was trying to decide where to put the WoF forum...were we a "cult"? ...a heterodox anomaly? ...mainline Pentecostal? We ended up here. At that time there were three very outspoken critics who would snarl their disdain for anyone who did not hate Copeland, refute Hagin and despise Benny Hinn.

Someone on the forum quoted a research blog I'd written on Hank Hanegraaff's critique of the revival in Toronto, and I caught the link and came to see what was happening. One of the critics here, and I don't think they're here anymore, proved that my reasoning wasn't valid, because I used Geocities. "I couldn't even afford my own web page." It still stands as one of the strongest arguments the critics have ever made.
 
I think you miss the meaning of Ted's post... WOF in this forum thought they could outlast the faithless critics. Ted posts that to remind them that they lost...
Why do you propose farming material like this, Joe? Outlast? Some don't sit in a study hall with nothing to do but wait for the next one. In twenty-five years, the only thing we've lost here is friends who tired of the callous conversations. No one has "won" or "lost" an argument. . You haven't changed in your view. I haven't changed in mine. But the effect on me has been that I can accept that you have your view and hold on to it well. I look forward sometimes to hearing it. The push and shove winds up being more of a give and take. It's much easier to read your posts now.

Personally, I don't care if they ever come back. I use this forum as my own playground as well as occasionally posting about the unrepentant doctrines of the movement. I don't mind saying that this forum has caused many WOF to leave the movement and others to modify their doctrines knowing what has been and is being taught is wrong.
"Many" might be exaggerated. Many have communicated to me that I answered their questions, and they are far more in line with WoF than any other hermeneutics. Those who have read the Bible know the biblical basis of the WoF paradigm and the nature of faith. Those who have read history know it's nothing new, but the basis for every revival in history, and don't need the critic's permission to believe the word Jesus Himself spoke.
 
Back
Top