Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

On judging Joel Osteen (Is it judgmental to call Osteen 'insufferable'?)
Joel Miller on the Intersection of Life and Faith ^ | 10/31/2011 | Joel Miller

Posted on 10/31/2011 10:27:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

It turns out that criticizing Joel Osteen ruffles feathers. Perhaps this shouldn't surprise. His congregation is more than forty-thousand strong, his sermons air worldwide, and his book sales are stratospheric. He's got more than a few fans available to take offense at someone holding his feet to the fire.

In response to my piece Friday, “The insufferable Joel Osteen,” several people said that I was “judging” Osteen, which is a considerable no-no. I was told I should be ashamed and that I should apologize.

But not so fast.

Is saying that a man is wrong “judging” him? “Judge not, that you be not judged,” said Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 7.1). But was the Lord saying that we should suspend our critical faculties? Was he saying that we should not correct others, an action that necessitates judging whether something is right or wrong? I don’t see how that’s possible since Paul directly tells Timothy to “[R]eprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching” (2 Tim. 4.2). It’s safe to say that Christ and his foremost apostle are singing from the same hymnal. Perhaps this all a bit more nuanced than not voicing a negative opinion about what another Christian says.

Importantly, I was not judging Osteen in the sense of identifying and condemning him for his sins, let alone calling his salvation into question. I was identifying an egregious theological error (equating Mormonism and Christian belief) and saying that he was not fit for his current job, points that are at least arguable if not self-evident. Since Paul clearly tells us that a minister of the gospel needs to have his doctrinal ducks in a row, this error seems like a big deal.

“He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke [there's that word again] those who contradict it” (Tit. 1.9).

Osteen flunks the test. He said that Mormons believe the same “core” teachings that Christians do. By any reading of their doctrinal statements or history, they clearly do not. Mormons follow another faith altogether at best or are at worst a new spin on the ancient heresy of Arianism (teaching that Jesus is a created being, something that Mormons confess). For Osteen to get this wrong is to be either negligent or ignorant — neither of which are okay for a man in his position.

Rebuking Osteen for making such an error is hardly an error unto itself. Is he not responsible for his pronouncements, accountable for what he says? Equating Mormonism and orthodox Christianity is wrong and reproachful. He deserves to have people call him on it.

If this were any other area of life, you can be sure we’d apply a different standard. Had Osteen, for example, suggested that taxes be increased (or lowered), that Occupy Wall Street protesters are justified (or not), or that Steve Jobs was the greatest (or most overrated) innovator of the last century, hackles and howls would rise from one quarter or another — and no one would suggest it was wrong to criticize him for his utterances, let alone say that the critic was in sin.

Yet we are to believe that if his statements are religious, then they are untouchable? That can’t be right. Given the gravity of theological or doctrinal statements, shouldn’t they be more seriously, critically, heavily scrutinized? Of course. As John says in his first letter, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4.1). Is testing judging? In a sense, but apparently not in the sense Jesus forbids because John here commands it. So we test the spirits. And what do we do with spirits that don’t pass the test? We call them out and reject them.

Directly following his directions to rebuke and reprove, Paul tells Timothy this: “[T]he time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths” (2 Tim. 4.3-4).

At the risk of incurring further wrath, let me say what is increasingly obvious to me: Osteen sounds conspicuously like one of these teachers. When I hear Joel Osteen, I don’t hear the gospel. I hear American materialism and shallow self-actualization dressed up like the gospel. I could be wrong, and God forgive me if I am, but that’s how I see it.

At the very least he is ill-equipped to serve and speak as he does. And saying as much is not shameful, nor does it deserve an apology.


TOPICS: Evangelical Christian; Ministry/Outreach; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: heresy; joelosteen; judging; judgmental; lds; mormonism; osteen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 last
To: Vigilanteman

I figured as much, but I asked because you mentioned the mormons are overwhelmingly conservative. [paraphrased]

When 94%+ of the votes went to Romney in the 2008 primary, would you consider that a vote for conservatism or simply identity politics?


61 posted on 11/01/2011 2:01:17 PM PDT by SZonian (July 27, 2010. Life begins anew.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: SZonian
I'd call it a logical choice considering the alternatives were two other RINOs (McCain & Huckabee) and a moonbat (Ron Paul) with a smattering of identity politics.

Duncan Hunter, a Baptist, won his only delegate in another Mormon heavy state (Wyoming).

It's rather hypocritical to lambaste an entire religious demographic for the sake of religion and then whine that they practice identity politics. Who doesn't to some extent or the other?

62 posted on 11/02/2011 8:11:17 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: RMDupree
“Wow. Just wow. As if you had any authority as to what goes on in people's hearts when they ask Jesus to become their Lord and Saviour. Or even when and how God chooses to call them to Him. I wouldn't dare question how God does things, but hey...if that's your view of our Lord..what can I say besides, good luck with that.

No wonder some folks want nothing to do with Christians. Sheesh.”

Lighten up Francis...

The original post used “he” in reference to Osteen as in “the number he has saved”. My point was if he (osteen) saved them, as opposed to salvation through Christ, then “they ain't saved”. Since the Bible says that salvation ONLY comes through Jesus (I am the Way, the Truth, and the Light, no man come to the Father but by Me) I stand by my post.

No wonder some folks want nothing to do with people who can't read for context and comprehension. Sheesh.

63 posted on 11/02/2011 8:12:20 AM PDT by fungoking (Tis a pleasure to live in the Ozarks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ken21
Olsteen is so nice and sweet, doesn't harm anyone’s ego and that is why he is so big. Jesus came as kindness but also to bring a sword of separation.
64 posted on 11/02/2011 8:13:35 AM PDT by fabian (" And a new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo with laughter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: P8riot
Our will is under bondage to sin until God sets it free, until then we are totally unable to choose for Christ. Indeed at that point we cannot choose otherwise.
Christ died for the elect. This is plainly taught in scripture. Indeed the entire modern concept of “free will” is a relatively recent construct. To think that we can foil the plan of God through exercise of our own will flies in the face of God's character. Jesus did not just make salvation possible, He secured it completely on the cross, and since he accomplished it the plan is complete. There is nothing more that needs to be done in order to secure salvation.

*shaking my head at the thought of someone saying that Jesus died for them and not me because I wasn't “predestined”*. Wow.

This comes from a lack of understanding of the subject of predestination. All who are, have been, or ever will be saved have been predestined to it. If you are a Christian, you have been too, you just have been taught that you had to do something (walk an aisle, say a prayer, etc....) to earn it. Nothing is further from the truth.

I would have a problem with someone saying that Jesus died for them and not me because I wasn't “predestined” too, because they have no way of knowing that I wasn't predestined to salvation. Some come to faith earlier than others, all in God's timing.

I've never met a 5 pointer, or a 7, who didn't think they were part of the elect as were their wife and kids. Easier to believe that there was a heavenly salvation lottery before time and that's just the way it is if you think you are one of the winners of that lottery.

65 posted on 11/02/2011 8:20:52 AM PDT by fungoking (Tis a pleasure to live in the Ozarks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: fungoking
No lottery, God predetermined our destiny, whether for good or evil. We each know in our heart how we relate to God, those that follow Christ and adhere to the scriptures can say with reasonable certainty that they are part of the elect.

I can't understand the need that some Christians have for feeding their own egos by somehow saying that they overcame their sin nature on their own, and chose Christ. Scripture is clear that we are hopelessly lost, and cannot approach God, except through his work of regeneration in our hearts. We bring absolutely nothing to the table but our sin. It is God who saves, not us.

66 posted on 11/02/2011 12:00:52 PM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop.....Eagle Scout since Sep 9, 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: P8riot
“I can't understand the need that some Christians have for feeding their own egos by somehow saying that they overcame their sin nature on their own, and chose Christ.”

I have never heard anyone (other than as a Calvinist straw man) claim this.

I guess we agree on this statement, no one can be saved unless convicted and called by the Holy Spirit.

I believe scripture teaches that there is no limit of who can be called, and at the time of the calling man can follow or stay in his sinful state. While God (being God) knows what the decision will be, he allows freedom of choice. The logical conclusion of this line of thought is that we need to follow the Great Commission and do as much as we can to spread the Gospel.

If there is no free will then why bother? Those who are going to be saved can't do anything to stop it and the condemned can't do anything to change it.

I just makes no sense of Jesus last words on Earth was to go evangelize the world if it really doesn't matter. Now let me be clear, I believe God had every right to set the way for man's atonement any way he wanted to. Like I said, show me a Calvinist who doesn't think they or their wife and children aren't one of the elect.

67 posted on 11/02/2011 12:27:52 PM PDT by fungoking (Tis a pleasure to live in the Ozarks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson