Johnathan Edwards in light of Roots and possible Double Standards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seal

Okay once again I don't think people are thinking here at all. B/c no one can correllate any scriptural Truth to back their answers. First of all Hagin and Edwards shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence. That's just my opinion. But to say that Edwards lifestyle contradicts his Truth is nothing new. Do you know what the scripture tells of the Life of Abraham, Jacob, and Isaac? Their lifestyle at times didn't reflect that they knew God at all nor worshipped him. But yet God showed Mercy to them. Hagin wouldn't know Truth if it tapped him on the shoulder and smacked him. That's just my opinion. But what I say about these saints is Truth and recorded in scripture. God used wicked sinners for his Glory. If you don't believe that, then look in the mirror. There's no double standard. In my opinion and what I've concluded from scripture Hagin and friends are preaching a different Gospel then the one past down through Church History. If you don't like that statement, take it to the Theo Boards and debate it.

Nobodies sin is justified nor could it be, but doctrine is to be judged by scripture.

Hail King Jesus,
seal

---

Seal the issue is not necessarily if Edwrads was Christian or not, I don't debate that & I don't think anyone else does. I don't know much about edwards, but in hearing part of the message BC posted, I believe dude was a brother as I just stated. It's interesting that you come at me defensive although I partly agreed with you on the life of Edwards in my last post:rolleyes: Hagin's gospel is no different from what's in the bible my dude sorry;) & I don't debate or argue, but we can discuss doctrine all day, but that will prove nothing sir, cause you can go straight to hell knowing "sound doctrine" Matter of Fact, Satan is a better theologan than anyone on this board, but is still going to Hell. See the study of God does nothing my dude, you can study Michael Jordan tapes all day, go to the MJ training camp all day but somehow still end up like Dickie Simpkins. Dude it's the life, otherwise Jesus wouldn't have come to give you life & life more abundantly He would've came to give you logical explanations of scripture. I'm not saying Edwards is in hell or nothing like that, but I will say that he ain't no different from Finney, but we'll see when we get to heaven

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devin

i would have to disagree.first Edwards doesnt preach a false gospel.Creflo,Jakes,Hinn and Hagin do.so theres no way the Doctrine can be argued here and there is no double standard..

---

How would you know? You just said you never read dudes stuff? You can't go around believeing everything you read on HCR or see on TV, that makes your doctrine just as faulty as anyone. Why cause you only believe what you hear. Man read up kid stop being changing direction with the wind,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dremarshall

How would you know? You just said you never read dudes stuff? You can't go around believeing everything you read on HCR or see on TV, that makes your doctrine just as faulty as anyone. Why cause you only believe what you hear. Man read up kid stop being changing direction with the wind,

---

aint no one changing direction.i know for SURE that creflo is a Heretic.aint no one being "wishy washy".im just taking somethings into consideration here.at the end your looking for an excuse to back up people that cant preach biblical truth.Edwards is an escape goat.and you know it.id like to see you talk about David,Abraham and other Great men of God in the bible and say theyre being judged by a Doube Standard.i can guarantee it that if i listened to 50 Edwards sermons you will still look for soemthing to put me on blast.you fail everytime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dremarshall

How would you know? You just said you never read dudes stuff? You can't go around believeing everything you read on HCR or see on TV, that makes your doctrine just as faulty as anyone. Why cause you only believe what you hear. Man read up kid stop being changing direction with the wind,

---

plus ive mentioned before that im relaying what others are saying.Seal believes this,Bondservant believes this.pretty much every JE supporter believes this.im just giving the message Dre.

but i'll be happy to listen to some Edwards sermons with you and compare them to Creflo's to see if they Biblically match:)

ps.i know about some of Edwards beliefs as the lean on a Calvinistic side.im not fully educate on his style of preaching but i am aware on some of his beliefs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devin

ive been thinking about this Edwards issue and peeping the thread.i cant help to think that some people are saying that If we can support Edwards knowing that he owned slaves then somehow Creflo,TD,Hagin and Hinn can be justified aswell.is this true?

i would have to disagree.first Edwards doesnt preach a false gospel.Creflo,Jakes,Hinn and Hagin do.so theres no way the Doctrine can be argued here and there is no double standard.if Edwards preached Heresy then he would be up there with Creflo and them.but he's not.also Seal DOES have a point when mentioning great men of the bible who have commited Adultry,Incest,Murder,Coveting and ETC.But these are men of the Bible we look up to.So hows it different with Edwards?alot of people think Edwards was some Racist Cracker Bigot.but how do we know?peep that sermon that i posted up.it will explain as to why he owned slaves.people are saying there is a Double Moral Standard when theyre isnt.Edwards and Hagin Dont compare because Hagin preaches false doctrine.Edwards doesnt.both men have sinned.like we ALL do.but we cant label Edwards a heretic because he sinned.thats crazy.if we were to operate under this logic the Piper and Washer are Bonafied HERETICS.Every great man of the Bible is Bonafied HERETIC.this Logic isnt even making any sense and is outta line.

---

Thank the Lord that someone sees the light!!!

There's not one place in my post where I have defended Edwards for him owning slaves. That's another debate all in itself. I even said that I'd BANG Edwards on that Curse of Ham nonsense and that he's a HERETIC ON THAT POINT!!! However, when it comes to these other guys they are off on EVERY POINT!!! Not naming names, just turn on your T.V.

Hail King Jesus,
seal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seal

Thank the Lord that someone sees the light!!!

There's not one place in my post where I have defended Edwards for him owning slaves. That's another debate all in itself. I even said that I'd BANG Edwards on that Curse of Ham nonsense and that he's a HERETIC ON THAT POINT!!! However, when it comes to these other guys they are off on EVERY POINT!!! Not naming names, just turn on your T.V.

Hail King Jesus,
seal

---

Can you be a HERETIC on one point? Isn't a HERETIC a HERETIC? It's one way or the other right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seal

Thank the Lord that someone sees the light!!!

There's not one place in my post where I have defended Edwards for him owning slaves. That's another debate all in itself. I even said that I'd BANG Edwards on that Curse of Ham nonsense and that he's a HERETIC ON THAT POINT!!! However, when it comes to these other guys they are off on EVERY POINT!!! Not naming names, just turn on your T.V.

Hail King Jesus,
seal

---

Seal, you sure they are off on EVERY point? I challenge you to prove that. Pick you favorite "heretic" (let's assume you'd choose Benny Hinn) and show that every point he has made, he is off. You are exaggerating in order to bolster you argument.

http://www.franklesser.com/black_clo...wn_college.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynaz24

Can you be a HERETIC on one point? Isn't a HERETIC a HERETIC? It's one way or the other right?

---

I think you're allowed one....LOL... ;) J/K...


I don't really believe in essentials b/c I believe every teaching is essential. Yet the Truth is no one has it all figured out. This is the purpose for debates b/c we need to Love on each other as we critically and exegetically examine the word of God for all it's virtue. God's Laws and Statues gives us God's Righteousness and reflect his Face. So as we analyze scripture we are able to weed out Heresy and learn from those who have gone before us for what they did right, and where they blowed it. Edwards blowed it when it came to the Curse of Ham, but he was right on Justification by Faith alone. It's a beautiful thing that God still shows Mercy even in our unbelief. But this isn't a Gray area. Christianity isn't a pool of Gray and we get in where we fit in.

One can be heretical on a few points but still be a believer. This answer isn't cut and dry though. One would have to give a Doctrinal Statement of Faith and we'd have to open the scripts and see if they are True. I.E. we've searched the script's on Edwards and found the Majority of his writings Biblically consistent. But when it comes to the curse of Ham, like the ideology of their time they missed that. Alot of people during that time believed that Heresy during that time of Edwards, but not the Puritans correct me if I'm wrong.



Hail King Jesus,
seal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seal

Yet the Truth is no one has it all figured out. This is the purpose for debates b/c we need to Love on each other as we critically and exegetically examine the word of God for all it's virtue.

---

Who is this and where did seal go? :confused:


just jk (kind of)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moody

Seal, you sure they are off on EVERY point? I challenge you to prove that. Pick you favorite "heretic" (let's assume you'd choose Benny Hinn) and show that every point he has made, he is off. You are exaggerating in order to bolster you argument.

http://www.franklesser.com/black_clo...wn_college.jpg

---

Well maybe you're right... Maybe I did exaggerate that point, but you'd have to prove it to me. If I pick up a book on Benny and his 9 person Trinity.... Oh let me take that back he made a correction... 6 persons in the Trinity I think he'd be skewed on pretty much all his views. The issue I think we'd run into is which Jesus Christ are you preaching, like always. He may be correct that Jesus saves but which one is he talking about. There are many false Christ in this world who mix in Truth and come up with an even bigger lie. So theres a balance and discussion we'd have to go through to see what's Truth or Lie.... You decide....

However, even though I exaggerated in your opinion you haven't posted or opened you mouth about my assertions until now. Why is that? Why didn't you answer my questions that I posted from scripture. When the convo is subjective everyone wants to hop in b/c they know it's a free for all but when them script's come up everybody ducks out, except for Eternal. Boi I tell ya....:mad:


Hail King Jesus,
seal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seal

I think you're allowed one....LOL... ;) J/K...


I don't really believe in essentials b/c I believe every teaching is essential. Yet the Truth is no one has it all figured out. This is the purpose for debates b/c we need to Love on each other as we critically and exegetically examine the word of God for all it's virtue. God's Laws and Statues gives us God's Righteousness and reflect his Face. So as we analyze scripture we are able to weed out Heresy and learn from those who have gone before us for what they did right, and where they blowed it. Edwards blowed it when it came to the Curse of Ham, but he was right on Justification by Faith alone. It's a beautiful thing that God still shows Mercy even in our unbelief. But this isn't a Gray area. Christianity isn't a pool of Gray and we get in where we fit in.

One can be heretical on a few points but still be a believer. This answer isn't cut and dry though. One would have to give a Doctrinal Statement of Faith and we'd have to open the scripts and see if they are True. I.E. we've searched the script's on Edwards and found the Majority of his writings Biblically consistent. But when it comes to the curse of Ham, like the ideology of their time they missed that. Alot of people during that time believed that Heresy during that time of Edwards, but not the Puritans correct me if I'm wrong.



Hail King Jesus,
seal

---

I co-sign with everything that you stated. So I guess we can put Benny Hinn and Jonathan Edwards in the same group... believers who got some stuff wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seal

I think you're allowed one....LOL... ;) J/K...


I don't really believe in essentials b/c I believe every teaching is essential. Yet the Truth is no one has it all figured out. This is the purpose for debates b/c we need to Love on each other as we critically and exegetically examine the word of God for all it's virtue. God's Laws and Statues gives us God's Righteousness and reflect his Face. So as we analyze scripture we are able to weed out Heresy and learn from those who have gone before us for what they did right, and where they blowed it. Edwards blowed it when it came to the Curse of Ham, but he was right on Justification by Faith alone. It's a beautiful thing that God still shows Mercy even in our unbelief. But this isn't a Gray area. Christianity isn't a pool of Gray and we get in where we fit in.

One can be heretical on a few points but still be a believer. This answer isn't cut and dry though. One would have to give a Doctrinal Statement of Faith and we'd have to open the scripts and see if they are True. I.E. we've searched the script's on Edwards and found the Majority of his writings Biblically consistent. But when it comes to the curse of Ham, like the ideology of their time they missed that. Alot of people during that time believed that Heresy during that time of Edwards, but not the Puritans correct me if I'm wrong.



Hail King Jesus,
seal

---

So in terms of like a TD Jakes..how does that fall..because the only argument against him I see on here deals with his wording in regards to the Trinity..Cuz honestly, I've read books by dude and seen him in person and they've been scripturally on point, but some on here will say that he is a wolf in sheeps clothing, or that he is not saved because of his stance or view of the trinity

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quiet storm

Who is this and where did seal go? :confused:


just jk (kind of)

---

Well maybe you need to get to know the seal you abhor a little bit more.... I Love everyone on here and I'd rather have them hate me for the Truth then Love me b/c I'm a push over. And if I don't have the Truth, I pray for that person who does bang the Truth into me so I can give what I freely received. That's just how I operate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moody

I co-sign with everything that you stated. So I guess we can put Benny Hinn and Jonathan Edwards in the same group... believers who got some stuff wrong.

---

Okay whatever Cookie :rolleyes: .... I'm glad you can see what you want to see in my post as if this is just a black and white issue. Well scripture does say they people would be carried like a cloud by every wind of Doctrine :rolleyes: Go Figure......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynaz24

So in terms of like a TD Jakes..how does that fall..because the only argument against him I see on here deals with his wording in regards to the Trinity..Cuz honestly, I've read books by dude and seen him in person and they've been scripturally on point, but some on here will say that he is a wolf in sheeps clothing, or that he is not saved because of his stance or view of the trinity

---

Well.... you deny the Trinity, you're denying the God of the scriptures and worshipping an idol. The God of the Bible is Trinitarian - One in essense and nature, three in Person.

If you say that God is just ONE PERSON as Jakes does, you're not teaching the God of the Bible. You denying the other two people of the Trinity - and therefore, your 'god' is an idol, no matter how much 'Jesus' you scream about.

That's idolatry and makes you a non-Christian, no matter how nice and loving and non-confrontational about it you appear. Jakes has been approached by dozens of Trinitarian preachers, both privately and publicly. He has not changed his position, nor desired to clarify further because he says the issue doesn't matter to him (his own words: "I'm not a theologian"). If not, then you have no business being in the pulpit.

A person who doesn't care enough about the 1st and 2nd commandment to get the doctrine of God right and present it clearly doesn't worship the God of the scriptures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynaz24

So in terms of like a TD Jakes..how does that fall..because the only argument against him I see on here deals with his wording in regards to the Trinity..Cuz honestly, I've read books by dude and seen him in person and they've been scripturally on point, but some on here will say that he is a wolf in sheeps clothing, or that he is not saved because of his stance or view of the trinity

---

That's actually a real good question Lynaz...I have no beef with Jakes. but I know others do. Now, I will say that I'm more into line upon line teaching rather than topical stuff, which Jakes does a LOT more now than he used to--but other than that, he's coo wit me...

COOKIE :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlackCalvinist

Well.... you deny the Trinity, you're denying the God of the scriptures and worshipping an idol. The God of the Bible is Trinitarian - One in essense and nature, three in Person.

If you say that God is just ONE PERSON as Jakes does, you're not teaching the God of the Bible. You denying the other two people of the Trinity - and therefore, your 'god' is an idol, no matter how much 'Jesus' you scream about.

That's idolatry and makes you a non-Christian, no matter how nice and loving and non-confrontational about it you appear. Jakes has been approached by dozens of Trinitarian preachers, both privately and publicly. He has not changed his position, nor desired to clarify further because he says the issue doesn't matter to him (his own words: "I'm not a theologian"). If not, then you have no business being in the pulpit.

A person who doesn't care enough about the 1st and 2nd commandment to get the doctrine of God right and present it clearly doesn't worship the God of the scriptures.

---

Are you sure he hasn't changed his stance? Do you have evidence of this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlackCalvinist

Well.... you deny the Trinity, you're denying the God of the scriptures and worshipping an idol. The God of the Bible is Trinitarian - One in essense and nature, three in Person.

If you say that God is just ONE PERSON as Jakes does, you're not teaching the God of the Bible. You denying the other two people of the Trinity - and therefore, your 'god' is an idol, no matter how much 'Jesus' you scream about.

That's idolatry and makes you a non-Christian, no matter how nice and loving and non-confrontational about it you appear. Jakes has been approached by dozens of Trinitarian preachers, both privately and publicly. He has not changed his position, nor desired to clarify further because he says the issue doesn't matter to him (his own words: "I'm not a theologian"). If not, then you have no business being in the pulpit.

A person who doesn't care enough about the 1st and 2nd commandment to get the doctrine of God right and present it clearly doesn't worship the God of the scriptures.

---

But I have read his point of view regarding the Trinity and it doesn't sound like he's denying it. then again it doesn't sound like he fully supports it..That wording can get so tricky sometimes..I just wish people would just come out and say stuff...enough of the super intellectual all the time..sometime a good ol "Jesus is Lord" is good for me...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynaz24

So in terms of like a TD Jakes..how does that fall..because the only argument against him I see on here deals with his wording in regards to the Trinity..Cuz honestly, I've read books by dude and seen him in person and they've been scripturally on point, but some on here will say that he is a wolf in sheeps clothing, or that he is not saved because of his stance or view of the trinity

---

I wouldn't say he's a wolf in sheep clothing b/c to me he's clearly a wolf. His stance on the Trinity is atrocious, so me and your issue on T.D. going to come from our presuppositional stances when it come to Doctrine. We are going to come to two different conclusions on Jakes. This is the reason for debate and discussion on what's the correct view of the Trininity and we do this by searching the Scriptures and Church History.