|
Post by jackjackson on Nov 6, 2006 17:11:42 GMT -5
Darc and Rev K:
I agree totally with Darc here brothers (maybe no surprise to many). The fact that Mr. Haggard (no longer Rev, like Rev K you would be just K) appeared to be full of the Spirit, knew the scriptures so well, and had a love enough for the Lord to initially give himself to the Lord, believing shows he once was a true believer.
I amazes me how far you could go Rev K to support your doctrinal beliefs in a clear case where this guy just went astray. He is a living example of what James taught in 1:12:16.
I the same way many will say he was never saved, if he does a "Jimmy Swaggert" the same will say he was saved all along, even in his sin.
If anyone knows anything about Meth, it causes a person a person to sink further and further into pornography and unnatural sexual experiences. They have trouble even having normal sexual relationships, because their partners alone can not satisfy their desires. The chemical hormones that are given off into the body from heterosexual relationships in marriage are different from similar ones that can be measured in homosexual and pornography. The second group doesn't cause satisfaction, but a desire for more.
It is possible that drugs might have broken down his inhabitions over time.
Mahatma, I regret having to disagree with your post, but must so please excuse me in advance and try and understand what I am about to say.
Because I come from a starting point that the the Bible is the Word of God, and since Romans 1:20-32 is so clearly stating that (especially) in verse 27, that homosexuality is unnatural, and that God sees one who does this "in error". This woud contradict the notion of one being born that way. Furthermore, no child starts off with any sexual desires, they awaken later the Bible says again in Song of Solomon, where we are warned to not awaken these desires to early. There is a consequence to awakening them too soon, maybe even homosexuality is that consequence. Experimentation with one of the same sex at an early age could be more responsible than any "genetic" one. For one who takes the Bible as truth and than God is not liar, nor responsible for ever causing anyone to sin, we cannot believe God made anyone that way, merely that they have unnatural affections.
Now based on your e-mail, I hope you will now not suggest because I have revealed what the Bible says that I too must be gay, because I have come out against it being natural according to the Bible. I believe you and I can agree we see this differntly, but I also hope you understand what my beliefs are based on, as I offer possible reasons, even beyond scriptural ones.
I know too that you don't really believe that just because someone comes against hard against something, doesn't mean they have anything to hide. If that were true, how should we take those who are pro gay rights? Do they secretly cover up the guilt that they know they shouldn't be gay? See how this thinking can cut both ways?
I pray that Ted Haggard finally ask God to take away his desires for men and drugs, as the Lord can do. Then once delivered from that bondage to sin, begin the process of helping others see they can call on the Lord too and be delivered from "all" their sins, by the power of the Holy Spirit, who wants us all to repent and forsake our sins.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 6, 2006 17:39:07 GMT -5
Jack,
I believe that may have been the most polite rebuttal I have ever read on the board. To clarify I certainly did not mean that anyone against homosexuality is gay, any more than I would suggest that anyone who crusades against gang violence is running a crime syndicate. However, it does seem demonstrably true that people who feel they are doing some specific thing wrong, particularly in religious communities, often work in a dilligent and public manner to stamp out that perceived wrong thing around them. If my phrasing made my post sound like a global accusation of homosexuality toward all who are socially conservative, then I obviously posted poorly and I apologize for any misunderstanding.
And I do understand that homosexuality is not an issue we are likely to see eye-to-eye on. Your literal interpretations and complete belief in the Bible in its entirety contrasts sharply with my world-view, and as we have seen in previous threads leads us to large disagreements in belief and in science. By saying that I mean in no way to disparage your belief in and interpretation of the Bible, but rather just to state the fact of my differing world views.
So in this thread I have not really been making an attempt to prove anyone wrong, nor will I. I was just sharing my opinions on the current events. All the best
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 6, 2006 17:48:08 GMT -5
As a follow-up, I also have to say I also disagree with you somewhat on meth leading to pornography and "unnatural" sexual experiences. I do feel strongly that meth is the most insidious and dangerous drug in the world, and that it is incredibly, horribly destructive, but sexual perversion was not something I saw meth "bring about", beyond the willingness of addicts to do just about anything to get a fix, which is true of the addicts of any hard drug. But your experiences with the tweaker "community" and with the effects of the drug may have been different than mine.
|
|
|
Post by darcfollowingjesus on Nov 6, 2006 18:22:05 GMT -5
That's just it Darc...you will NEVER know this side of Heaven whether Haggard was ever saved before or not and I will never know either. So, let's just stick to the facts: He needs to repent and we need to forgive and pray...simple as that. I need to clear this up. You and I may not know for sure, that is why I admonished every Christian not to get caught up in this (our idle words will be brought to light one day), but that is certainly not the case with those most intimate with him. There are many examples in the Bible which clearly show the behaviors of children of the devil vs children of God, by which, this side of the grave we can absolutely know. There's two groups in the Bible revk and I know you know this. Those saved (saints) on their way up the narrow road to life and then those that are lost (sinners) which are on the broad road that leads down to destruction (Mt 7:13-14). We have list after list given to us in Scripture which clearly identifies who is who. I know this much about Ted Haggard. 10-14 years ago (not real sure of the exact time, could be wrong here) he started this church in his basement with just a few faithful followers of Christ. Now you could argue whether the evidence of where the congregation is at today (around 14K) is actually fruit of him being truly a convert of Jesus or not but I believe it speaks for itself and he definitely was at one point a convert of Jesus, following Him as an obedient present tense believer.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Nov 6, 2006 20:05:33 GMT -5
That was my first reaction also.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 7, 2006 8:16:23 GMT -5
Jack and Darc, I truly understand where both of you are coming from and if this man really had Godly fruit and you KNEW that it was Godly fruit FOR SURE, then I could possibly agree with you. However, I still wouldn't be able to because I don't base truth on experience, I base it on what I find in the Word. Neither one of you know if his fruit was TRULY godly fruit or not. Just because he started a Church about 26 years ago and it is now 14,000 people, doesn't mean anything. Even if he was preaching the truth and the whole truth! He has been a hypocrite for at least the last three years. Does that mean that is good fruit came from his ministry (preaching, teaching, leadership, books) in the last three years, that he was saved then as well?
Do you guys really understand what you are saying here? And we ALL can agree that someone doesn't just go out one day and decide to do either of these sins: homosexuality and meth. Homosexuality is a specially depraved sin according to Romans. It is one that God has to give them over to over time due to their sin of idolatry. I have never done drugs myself, but have had many friends that have and have a sister who has been a drug addict for quite some time. It usually goes down this path: weed, acid, cocaine, heroine, then maybe meth. The drug addict just keeps looking for a bigger high. That doesn't necessarily mean this is the case with Ted (by the way Jack, I wouldn't dare call him Rev at this point), but this has been the case with everyone I have ever know that has done drugs. With all of this being said, the accuser says that Ted (or "Art" as he knew him) and him have been having homosexual sex at least once a month for the last three years and that Ted has done drugs each time as well. Surely Ted was involved with something else before then! Surely he was involved in pornography (probably heterosexual at first) and then slowly went down hill over time. Even if the accusers statements were totally false (even though he has been more honest then Ted), Ted's statement was read to his old Church body on Sunday morning. This is what part of it said: "There is part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I've been warring against it all of my adult life." Now, I know both of you didn't know this before...but, can you still say now that he was saved? If he has been involved in this sin for "all of his adult life"? I would call that practicing sin. If it is, then he has never been a Christian according to 1 John 3:9.
Also, it may SEEM that he has had some Godly fruit, but didn't the people that Jesus spoke about in Matthew 7:22-23 SEEM to have Godly fruit as well? Didn't the Pharisees SEEM to have Godly fruit as well. Only Jesus and John the Baptist, through the discernment of the Spirit, were able to discern that their insides were filthy, dirty and evil. The people spoken about in Matthew 7:22-23 drove out demons, performed miracles and preached the Word and yet Jesus NEVER knew them. Couldn't this then be true of Ted as well? I think so. The only other possibility from your doctrinal point of you, after knowing all the facts of this situation, is if Ted got saved a long time ago and then fell away before he became an adult. Otherwise, he has been leading the life of a hypocrite ALL this time. Even if we take Ted Haggard out of the situation for a second. Let's say someone like Leonard Ravenhill looked at pornography all his life, but NO ONE ever found out. You and I believe and really think that he lived a very Godly life. Does that mean he was ever a Christian? Couldn't God use him for the good even though he would be in Hell right now and have never of been a Christian ever? I only use Brother Ravenhill as an example because I have been blessed by him and his ministry. Forgive me if you are offended...just an example.
On a side note, I think the scariest thing about this whole situation is the lack of discernment of God's people. If the people who he is leading are really praying for him, wouldn't at least somebody of gotten discernment from God about what he was involved in? I mean, he was the head of a very large evangelical association which represents more than 45,000 churches with have around 30 million members. Shouldn't someone have caught on?
|
|
|
Post by jackjackson on Nov 8, 2006 13:43:39 GMT -5
Rev K:
I am also scratching my head about the last part of your post. I too am amazed that the Lord didn't give them discernment; but we must admit that even Christians can be "Deceived on Purpose" (a great book by Warren Smith).
Many in the "body of Christ" have been suspect of Haggard for other reasons and signs. I had included him in my rebuke of those who wanted to join with Rick Warren to protect the world from Global Warming, when we Christians know God controls the weather.
We can't get around the Word of God, and need to be careful about experiences; yet Jesus manifests Himself to us, and that is Biblical; otherwise how could anyone really say they know Him? If they have merely a head knowledge from the Bible, that is not the same as a "true relationship" with a real Lord.
You stated: "If he has been involved in this sin for "all of his adult life"? I would call that practicing sin. If it is, then he has never been a Christian according to 1 John 3:9. "
In fact he also stated that he struggled with the desires. Is struggling against the desire of the flesh warring in us a sin? Is being tempted now a sin? Be angry, but do not sin.... Yes looking with lust is a sin, but there is a point where looking starts as looking (seeing an image) then moves to a point of actually lusting over that image. This is the point from James 1:12-16; we can become drawn away of our own lusts and desire. It becomes sin, according to verse 15 when it is conceived, and brings death when it is finished.
We see many examples in scriptures of men walking with God, and then falling away, so why do we find it so hard to believe that a man like Ted Haggard, didn't just eventually give in to the desires?
Rev K, please realize our own prejudices in theology, naturally lead us to different "possibilities" of what happened. Even our experiences can. I know I had a "desire" that tried to carry me off to spiritual death as a new believers, but the Lord after I asked Him to take it away of kill me so I wouldn't embarrass Him, did so.
Did that mean that while I was struggling with temptation, I was not yet really born again? I don't think so. The love I had for the Lord, and His love in me, had brought about a change that could only be explained by His Holy Spirit; yet like Paul, I realized I must keep my body in subjection, lest I preach the gospel, and yet myself become a castaway.
Ted Haggard, knew the judgment of God, that such things were worthy of death, yet chose to do them anyway. Some read Romans 1 - 2:3, and assume Paul is speaking of unbelievers. Their theology requires that. But when we look at 1:21, these are they that "knew God", yet gloified him not . They became vain! An unbeliever starts out vain, so can't become vain, only a believer can. An unbeliever starts with a dark heart, so their heart can't become darkened if it wasn't first made light.
When one reads thes passages without the prejudice that men cannot fall away, he must read these as unbelievers; however, when a person consider for a moment the possibilty that one could at one time know God, and be drawn away from Him, by his own lusts and desires, the passage's meaning clearly speaks of a man like Ted Haggard, and many others who have and will continue to fall away. This fall away is to fall away from something. Since true unbelievers never fell to Him, they can't possibily fall away.
Although I think Ray Comfort's thoughts on the law are great and I love him as a Brother in Christ; a statement like "a backslider never slide forward" is obsurd in light of the term itself. I initially loved the " true and false conversion" because it seemed to explain why so many seemed to fall away, which always confused me, being raised in a theology that "once saved always saved" (OSAS) was true. When a person looks through a lens assuming "OSAS" then they would have to be false converts, or not really ever believers with any life of God in them.
However, when one looks through the lens that one can fall away, and therefore believe for a while, the idea of true and false conversions comes down to enduring to the end.
Since myself and Darc, believe by scripture that a person can fallaway, and have experienced situations in our lives where we felt at that divide of being drawn away forever; it is critical to us to have believers consider the warnings of scripture and hold fast, not allowing their little sins to start off and draw them away to death (again).
Jesus said some believed for a while, so since I believe Him in other places in scripture, I believe Him there as well.
Do you truly understand the consequences that are at stake here? If.......if it is possible to fall away; teaching and teachers that teach you can't, are teaching the doctrines of devils........willingly or unwilling.........helping Satan re-capture Saints (former Saints)........all because they chose to ignore clear scriptrures........holding firmly to doctrines that were preferred by men.
No one.........No one..............who knows the judgment of God, that those who do such things (continue in a wilful sinful behavior) are worthy of death.......and does them anyway.........even if a teachers said they could loose their salvation..........will be able to say a word at judgment........if.........Jesus looks at them and starts quoting Hebrews 10:26 "For if we sin wilfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin"........Depart from Me, you worker of iniquity!!!!!!!!!
I don't care how many verses you want to justify your doctrine by......I don't care how many teachers says otherwise......Since Jesus could say that to a person at judgment day, to me or you, and because I would then have no excuse, because it was in scripture, plain as day.......it compells me to not remain in wiful sin, and to warn others to quit listening to doctrines that tickle their ears, and obey was God's word says. If warning people to not fallaway was good enough for Jesus, Paul, Peter, Jude, James, and John (not to mentions all the OT prophets).......Isn't it still something we should all be doing?
God help us and we all watch the apostacy happening before our eyes while many ignore it is predicted and try to say "these really never believed"...............no wonder Jesus said the Laodiceans were "blind". The blind are leading the blind right back into the ditch.
God help us!!!!!!!!!!!
Jack
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 8, 2006 13:54:06 GMT -5
I certainly don't know scripture as well as any of the people centrally involved in this argument, but it sounds a lot like a matter of semantics more than anything else? If one side is arguing that you can be saved and then lose your salvation, and the other side is arguing that you can -think- you were saved, but then later prove that you were not actually saved, doesn't it come out to six of one and a half dozen of the other?
Say Frank and Joe both get "saved" at the same time. Frank goes to his grave having followed every single line of law in every book of the (pick your version and printing) Bible. Joe, on the other hand, ten years later becomes a drunken drug addict and runs over a girl in his car while drunk, and he dies in the wreck. At the end of the day, aren't you -both- arguing that Frank is going to heaven and Joe is going to Hell? Whether Joe lost his salvation or was never saved at all, the spiritual result seems to be exactly the same...
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 8, 2006 17:10:28 GMT -5
Jack, I don't have time to respond to your post now and even though I would love to I doubt I ever will. Don't see any need to. It is so ironic though that you ask me to take away my theological prejudices to see things your way, when you won't do the same. The fact is that I used to believe that someone could lose their salvation. Now I don't...and it has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING EXCEPT for the fact that it is what I see in Scripture! Simple as that! So, brother, you can go on your little rant about how people who believe you can't lose your salvation believe in the "doctine of devils" if you want, but I could say the same about you. We won't go there though....God Bless....
|
|
|
Post by jackjackson on Nov 8, 2006 18:46:03 GMT -5
Mahatma:
If I send two people on a journey along a long path. I tell one that he will surely make it, no matter what. The other I warn of the pitfalls that are known to be along that path, and tell that one to to be very careful, because some of the perils could keep him from even making it, making it very important for him not to be tricked off the path.
Both could in fact make it to the end, but the second certainly has less of a chance to fall prey along the way.
Rev K:
Although I now feel badly that I may have offended you, I can assure you what I wrote was not "ranting", but exhorting. It seems a bit odd. You and I started at different sides of this issue, and have both been convinced by scripture that our former position was wrong.
Is my position is wrong, and a person trusted Jesus, and kept themselves from wilfull sin; they are still going to be in heaven. Where will the one be who trusted Jesus, but died in wilful sin go, even if he thinks he is saved?
Since neither you, nor any other person can look anyone in the eye and assure that person with 100 percent confidence that Jesus will not, or could not quote Hebrews 10:26-29 to them at Judgment Day: neither you, nor anyone, should feel comfortable, ever giving comfort to a person living in a wilful sin that they still have a sacrifice for sin while they remain in that condition. I believe to do so is not warning them of clear danger and that their blood will be on the ones who falsely gave them confidence (Ezk 3, 18, and 33).
What you or others think that about, or whether that message is heeded, or whether anyone believes the verses in Ezk apply, will between them and the Lord. As for me and my house (the sheep the Lord has given me) we will serve (and obey) the Lord.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 8, 2006 19:58:07 GMT -5
I understand what you're saying Jack, but it sounds like you would send the person off warning of the pitfalls along the way, while RevK would send the person off telling them "It's a dangerous path and many never make it to the end, but if you fall off the path then you were not meant to be on it in the first place." That's a little different than "You will definitely make it" and it warns someone that the path is a dangerous place.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 8, 2006 20:50:24 GMT -5
Jack, I love the way that you seem to be ASSUMING that I am an Antinomianist! You obviously know NOTHING about me. Anyone on this board who knows me and what I believe knows that I stand for holiness...simple as that! But as for this discussion with you...I am done discussing it.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Nov 8, 2006 22:13:05 GMT -5
Jack, I love the way that you seem to be ASSUMING that I am an Antinomianist! You obviously know NOTHING about me. Anyone on this board who knows me and what I believe knows that I stand for holiness...simple as that! But as for this discussion with you...I am done discussing it. Rev, you devil you... (for anyone that doesn't know what I'm talking about browse the video section)
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 8, 2006 22:20:22 GMT -5
Jack, I love the way that you seem to be ASSUMING that I am an Antinomianist! You obviously know NOTHING about me. Anyone on this board who knows me and what I believe knows that I stand for holiness...simple as that! But as for this discussion with you...I am done discussing it. Rev, you devil you... (for anyone that doesn't know what I'm talking about browse the video section) Good one Josh...didn't see that coming...you just couldn't resist could you ;D
|
|
|
Post by jackjackson on Nov 9, 2006 12:39:30 GMT -5
Mahatma:
They point is some send people along the way, even tell them it is a hard road, but many (since I don't really know Rev K, I am not including him) won't tell them that the some don't make it, and that they must endure to the end to even get there. Some see just starting on the path as good enough.
Rev K:
I am truly sorrow if I in anyway offended you here. I am certainly not intentionally trying to do that. If I have misrepresented you in some way, or assumed something that was not true, I apologize and I beg your forgiveness.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 9, 2006 16:17:40 GMT -5
Jack, I forgive you. I think that Mahatma hit the nail on the head. You say that if someone continues on in willful sin that they lost their salvation. I say that they were never saved in the first place. The point is that both of us say that such a person will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God. Believe me, I have read Scripture from your point of view. I have just come to different conclusions. I have discussed and argued about whether someone can lose their salvation or not on this boards and in person quite a bit. To tell you the truth, I really don't care to discuss it anymore. You will not change what I believe on this and it is obvious that I am not going to change what you believe on this. One of us IS wrong. We will just have to wait until that Day to find out. But, one thing I can tell you is this: even if I am wrong, I am not teaching doctrines of the devils as you said and as Darc would say. Without Holiness NO ONE will see the Lord!!
|
|
|
Post by luketentwo on Nov 12, 2006 22:33:27 GMT -5
Jack, I forgive you. I think that Mahatma hit the nail on the head. You say that if someone continues on in willful sin that they lost their salvation. I say that they were never saved in the first place. The point is that both of us say that such a person will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God. Believe me, I have read Scripture from your point of view. I have just come to different conclusions. I have discussed and argued about whether someone can lose their salvation or not on this boards and in person quite a bit. To tell you the truth, I really don't care to discuss it anymore. You will not change what I believe on this and it is obvious that I am not going to change what you believe on this. One of us IS wrong. We will just have to wait until that Day to find out. But, one thing I can tell you is this: even if I am wrong, I am not teaching doctrines of the devils as you said and as Darc would say. Without Holiness NO ONE will see the Lord!! Hey Rev K, I preached a message on this today. www.shawnholes.com/moriahloud.mp3 anyway, one thing I am intersted in knowing is why do people bring up King David and his sin in regards to this situation. also, I was told from two Brothers and one Sister that I should have used A) more discernment and not talked about Ted from the pulpit like I did, and B) To make a statement that he may not have been saved is too assuming. If you can understand my questions please respond. btw, I am in agreement with your points on this.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Nov 12, 2006 22:36:01 GMT -5
I'd say that to say that Ted was saved during all this is more then assuming too much, it's straight out deception!
He either
1. Has never been saved
2. Left his salvation
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 12, 2006 23:37:55 GMT -5
Hey Shawn, when I get a chance I will listen to your message. In general though, one thing I can tell you is this: people HATE it when you name names from the pulpit. I used to name names all the time. Of course, I used discernment and made sure all my facts were right and backed up with Scripture before I did. I would name people like Benny Hinn, the TBN preachers, Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, etc. People just don't like it. I find it all throughout Scripture though. They usually say something like, "look at all the good that has happened through them" or something. One time my friend named Benny Hinn and because one family in this fairly large Church got really offended, the staff got on him pretty hard about it. That family said that their child got saved at one of his events. I don't doubt that God can, has and will use False Teachers, Prophets and Counterfeit Christian Pastors. I have a good friend who realized he wasn't even a Christian about 3 years ago. He had already been a Pastor for quite some time though! Another friend of mine sat under his preaching while he wasn't saved. He said that he was a "good preacher." Most thought he was crazy when he came out and told them that he wasn't saved that whole time. As far as being "TOO ASSUMING" when it comes to saying that he wasn't saved...well, the question then becomes can a 3 year homosexual (and most likely more according to his vague statements-whole adult life) be a Christian? My Bible says NO, NO, NO! So, depending on your theology, he either lost his salvation long ago or HE WAS NEVER SAVED! Of course, I believe that He was NEVER saved in the first place. It is very ironic that Christian people have no problem telling someone that they are saved, but have a big problem with telling someone that they aren't. I find the EXACT OPPOSITE in the Bible. It is like Paul Washer says, "I fear for men who have been telling people all their lives that they are saved." Our calling is to tell people HOW to be saved and then what a Saved person's life looks like. God Bless bro...
|
|
|
Post by luketentwo on Nov 13, 2006 6:55:09 GMT -5
Thank you Rev. ( I am not trying to beat a dead horse here, BUT) Twice yesterday after my message it was said to me that king David "swam" in sin while being "saved". I guess what I am saying is if you can, in some way, correspond, or explain the two situations (King David and Ted) I would so appreciate it cause that is how people are justifying Teds sin.
I am sooooo interested in this Ted thing. I don't understand How he can sin so gravely and be considered as saved. I believe He will realize that he was never saved to begin with soon.
In Christ,
Shawn
|
|
|
Post by dale on Nov 13, 2006 7:42:01 GMT -5
There is an interesting story about Olsteen now that he is brought up, told to me by one of the Christians I know who used to like him and confirmed by a nonchristian who is worse than me whos aw the same routine. When he was touring the country, speaking in churches and plugging some book of his, he evidently did not count on people seeing him do the same routine or attending one of his speaking engagements in two seperate towns.
As soon as he got to the point where he spoke about his father 's death, he would break down in tears and take a pause being barely able to continue, while the audience prayed for him, felt his pain and felt so sorry for him. The problem was he did this in three seperate locations, at the exact same time and exact same point as if operating on some inner signal, which of course he was. People feeling sorry for him were apt to give more to his ministry and to buy his books. Easiest trick int he world. Could he have been elgitimately torn by his father' s death? Yes of course, but the key is, if it is so traumatic, why speak about it and why break down, suspiciously enough, at the exact same point, during the exact same sermon? This guyw as skinning his victims alive in the audience, just taking the marks for more money.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 13, 2006 8:34:34 GMT -5
Sorry Shawn, I guess that I missed that part. To tell you the truth, I really don't know the answer to that question from the theology that one can't lose their salvation. I really haven't looked into it enough. But anytime someone tries to justify someone's sin by pointing to someone in the Bible who sinned, there is definitely something wrong there. Does the Bible say that David was a Christian before he did these things? I would say that things were possibly different in the O.T. Men were not filled with the Holy Spirit or Born Again. They were not regenerated. Some people will say that King Saul was saved. I would say that he was never saved...EVER. Yeah, I know, he prophesied and was anointed with the Holy Spirit, but that was a Kingly anointing because of his position as King and nothing else. The people in Matthew 7:21-23 prophesied, but they NEVER knew him according to Matthew 7:23. Plus, I think that it is after David repented of these sins that he was called a man after God's own heart. I guess I would ask these people what King David's sin has to do with Ted Haggard when the Scripture clearly teaches that a homosexual will not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9) and that homosexuality is a sin that God's gives them over to because of their continual idolatry (Romans 1). I know this probably doesn't answer this question very well, but it's the best I have right now. I really haven't looked into David's situation enough...
|
|
|
Post by luketentwo on Nov 13, 2006 11:33:09 GMT -5
great this helps. I will go back and read about King david to brush up on his life as well.
In Him,
Shawn
|
|
|
Post by dale on Nov 13, 2006 11:57:49 GMT -5
One thing you all fail to see his is the crowd this Haggard preached to. He would have had one of those cultlike TBN type followings and the flock "need for himt o be saved" because they indirectly worship him, follow me. They "need' him to have been "saved" but "yielding to temptation" rather than a crook, a santucho or a pseudochristian wearing a happy face mask. I would bet salvation on it, I believe I am THAT right, that the bulk of the people still supoporting him are his die-hard followers and not Christoans as a whole, just like the people who supoprted Swaggart when he got caught how many times, yet they still bought his tearful "My god I have sinned before you" tapdance and song, how many times?
The people who are going to support this joker in spite of everything going to pull out every Bible verse they can, in or out of context, every biblical example of someone screwing up (Lot, David, Solomon, whoever else you have there), and put blame on the devil for tempting this guy (whatever happened to rising above temptation) because the reality that they were listening to and following a (insert explitives of your choice here) is too much for them too handle, too wet and cold of a towel in the face, roo strong of a wakeup call...
The reaction of some of these people and their attempts to play down this guy should come as no surprise to anyone.
|
|
|
Post by beniah on Nov 14, 2006 0:33:01 GMT -5
This is another manifestation of modern day NEO-EVANGELICALISM at its worst! We will be introducing a new satirical video for all the NEW-EVANGELICALS out there titled: Back Rubs for Preachers! which will go right along with Back Rubs-4-Jesus! www.youtube.com/watch?v=mohixsVRNdcThe ACCOUNTABILITY of those in leadership positions OVER the flock is extremely high....Here are a few reminders of the charge. James 3:1 1 My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment. (NKJV) 1 Tim 3:1-13 1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. 8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; 9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. 10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. 11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. 12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus. Romans 2: 19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, 20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. 21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? 22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? 23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? 24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.This is similar in kind to the Enron scandal....DECIEVERS and LIARS at the helm. The STENCH of this high perversion reaches the throne room of Christ and Jesus only has one thing to say: Matthew 11:20-25 20 Then He began to rebuke the cities in which most of His mighty works had been done, because they did not repent: 21 "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 "But I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you. 23 "And you, Capernaum, who are exalted to heaven, will be brought down to Hades; for if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. 24 "But I say to you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for you." 25 ¶ At that time Jesus answered and said, "I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes.
|
|
|
Post by jackjackson on Nov 15, 2006 1:24:15 GMT -5
The trouble with the King David situation is many who believe in once saved always saved use David as an example for their cause.
Note what david says in Psalm 51:
"renew a right spirit within me" in verse 9. Can you renew something you did not once have? Can you renew your library card, once it expires, if you don't have one; or would you just have to ask for a right spirit, not a renewal? He also asks in like manner "Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation" in verse 12. Can your restore anything that wasn't first lost?
This last verse speaks clearly and directly to salvation. Before David sinned, he had a right spirit and joy of salvation in the Lord. This is not some dispensation argument, no one was ever saved apart from Christ. But David lost it and had to asked to be renew and restored.
Looking to others in scriptures is very important, otherwise Paul's warning to us in Romans 11 wouldn't make sense, nor Paul's warnings about widows loosing their salvation in 1 Tim. 5:11-14, or Alexander and Hymmenaeus in 1 Tim 19-20; or warnings about Demas. The Bible names names!!!!
Jack
|
|
|
Post by luketentwo on Nov 15, 2006 5:49:39 GMT -5
... I'm not sure what all that means Jack. Too much info maybe. Good points though. I will chew on them.
I keep wondering if a born again Christian could continually have a homsexual relationship, and still be saved. And those drugs! Can we being regenerate do these kinds of things. Ted was committing an abomination while being a Christian! I think not. If he really was saved he would not have even wanted to do these horrific sins.
I am praying for this man. It is so on my heart that he gets saved and be converted.
In Christ,
Shawn
|
|
|
Post by dale on Nov 15, 2006 7:04:37 GMT -5
Wht are youa ll so worried aboiut Haggard? Why don;t you go and focus on the unsaved sinners like me or whoever outt here, who you run into every day or cross paths with and have the power (well maybe) to help, rather than placing all the emphasis on this scumbag ex-evangelist?
|
|
|
Post by berean73 on Nov 15, 2006 8:35:49 GMT -5
Awww Dale, nobody has forgotten about you man. We still care! ;D
I'm of the same opinion as luketentwo, so Ted needs Jesus just as much as you. Hey maybe he has already repented..... have you?
Z
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 15, 2006 15:22:41 GMT -5
Note what david says in Psalm 51: "renew a right spirit within me" in verse 9. Can you renew something you did not once have? Can you renew your library card, once it expires, if you don't have one; or would you just have to ask for a right spirit, not a renewal? He also asks in like manner "Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation" in verse 12. Can your restore anything that wasn't first lost? This last verse speaks clearly and directly to salvation. Before David sinned, he had a right spirit and joy of salvation in the Lord. This is not some dispensation argument, no one was ever saved apart from Christ. But David lost it and had to asked to be renew and restored. First of all, renewing a "right spirit" within me doesn't mean he lost the Spirit. One would have to read into things to get that out of it. Notice that David doesn't pray that God gives the Spirit back to him, but to renew a "right spirit" within him. Paul says to continually be filled with the Spirit. The fact that David says down in verse 11, "Do not cast me away from your presence, And do not take your Holy Spirit from me" tells me that he STILL had the Spirit. Why we he plead with God not to take something away that he still had? Also, if you read all of verse 10, you will see that he is pleading with God to purify him, which can only be done by the Spirit of God. He is pleading with God to create in him a clean heart and to renew a steadfast spirit within him. Also, notice in your Bible that the "spirit" you are referring to as him losing in verse 10 does not seem to be referring to the Holy Spirit anyway when read in context. It seems to be referring to David's spirit. It is not capitalized in my NKJV, so the translator's of the NKJV seem to think David is referring to his spirit and not the Holy Spirit as well. Also the last verse definitely DOES NOT speak clearly and directly to salvation. This is what it says: "Restore to me the JOY of your salvation..." He asks God to restore the JOY of salvation, not salvation itself. I personally don't know the answer to David's situation in light of my own theology, but David CLEARLY didn't think that he wasn't saved or that he lost his salvation...
|
|