gdp's Comments

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Jeremiah 29:11 is NOT ABOUT YOU!

Wed, 14 Feb 2018 00:35:35 +0000

Marlo; Did you read my post? I explained the context of Jeremiah 29:11 and why it would be erroneous to apply it to everyone. Verse 14 makes it clear who the "you" is and what the "plans" are.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Talking Kinism on the \"Citizen of New Jerusalem\" Podcast

Thu, 7 Sep 2017 01:13:31 +0000

Mr. Seabrook, thank you for your post. You say in your response "Kinists have written a great deal on this topic, and before you attempt to denounce Kinism as a heresy, you need to deal with it." I'm not sure if you listened to the podcast in its entirety, or at least very carefully, but I make mention that I've dealt with the issue of Rahab, and intend to deal with the issue of Ruth in a future post, let alone do I make mention that I've written other posts on Kinism on my blog. Likewise, I've dealt with the "Rule of Kin Law" as well as the passages in Ezra and Nehemiah (which are actually handled in one of the Rahab posts). If you look at the Kinist tag on my blog, or click on the Kinist tag on this very post, you'll see those articles, where I go into greater detail than a one-hour podcast can get into. To accuse me of not dealing with something before calling it a heresy is, ironically, not dealing with something before giving a criticism. Likewise, to accuse me of having "evaded the Kinist arguments," when 1) I've got a limited amount of time on a one-hour podcast to touch on the subject, and 2) I, once again, say in the podcast that I go into more depth on my blog, is both completely untrue and completely ungracious. Also, regarding your comment here: "The task at hand is for you to produce the biblical proof that I am to be convicted of sin for requiring that my grandchildren should be of my own people." As the father of a little girl, I'm not going to argue about whether or not a parent has authority over a child. However, to in essence argue "Prove it ISN'T a sin!" is to shift the burden of proof. If I'm to tell my daughter it's a sin (not just unwise, or arbitrarily forbidden, but a sin) to marry a black man, I need to have biblical grounds to do so. Kinists believe they've presented a case for it - but I've examined their case, and it's scripturally unsound. I dealt with it somewhat here in the podcast, and I deal with it elsewhere on my blog (and intend to continue dealing with it).

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : IHOP-KC Supports \"The Shack\"

Wed, 28 Jun 2017 08:11:14 +0000

Mr. Augustine, thank you for your post. I think you may have misunderstood a few things in my post, however. For one, I did not say that "Apokatasis doesn't work"; what I said was that I was not equating the Apokatasis view and the view of judgment in "The Shack" as equatable, only that "The Shack" and William Paul Young's view of judgment was much closer to an ancient heresy than orthodox, historical Christianity. For another, you say that I said Young's book was "Classical Christian Liberalism (experiential via Schleiermacher) vrs Reformation thought (Sola Scriptora)." Actually, what I pointed out in the article was the appeal by IHOP-KC and "Shack" defenders of the experience people have reading the book or watching the movie. In other words, who cares about the error within, so long as someone feels emotionally fulfilled, or has some life-altering realization from it? In fact, when I bring up sola scriptura, it's actually to show the faults in IHOP-KC's thinking. The section where I quote sola scriptura in full: Sadly, that such a mindset is coming from IHOP-KC does not surprise me. When speaking to members in the past, and attempting to show the errors of Mike Bickle's teachings, the most common response I get is, "I feel personally fulfilled, that's how I know it's right." When you listen to the testimonies of those who have joined IHOP-KC, one common theme is that they were personally moved by what was going on, and that was why they joined. This is simply the logical conclusion of the Charismatic doctrine of solus adfectus, or "emotions alone," over and against sola scriptura. If someone is moved to tears, and it involves God, then it doesn't matter what else we know about it - it has to be real. When we adopt such a mindset, we shouldn't be shocked if unbiblical portrayals of God seem alright to us, based mostly on the notion that someone is emotionally "healed" by it.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Mike Bickle and His Time with God

Wed, 10 May 2017 02:59:55 +0000

Mr. De Leon, thank you for your post; I would advise that you look at my other posts on IHOP-KC, which examines their doctrines and teachings. What has been found, over and over again, is that Mike Bickle and his peers continually twist and mishandle scripture to get it to say what they want. They continue to read an end times movement into passages where no such movement exists. Given all this, I cannot truly believe, after being a good Berean, that IHOP-KC is led by the Holy Spirit.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Was the Faithful Centurion Gay?

Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:01:38 +0000

What?

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Where did Cain\'s wife come from?

Thu, 12 May 2016 04:44:06 +0000

Mel, thank you for your post. Where are you getting that Eve didn't have another child for 130 years? I think you're being confused by Genesis 5:3, where it says Adam was 130-years old when Seth was born. This doesn't tell us how old Adam was when he and Eve had Cain and Abel. As for the two stories of creation, one is a summarized version, while the other is a specific account of what happened that day.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Getting Parables Horribly Wrong: The Prodigal Son

Wed, 2 Mar 2016 03:56:10 +0000

Jeff, thanks for your post; I sort of "discovered" I was a Calvinist myself, long ago. I was coming out of Eastern Orthodoxy and just repeating what scripture said, and kept getting told, by EO and non-EO alike, "You're sounding really Reformed." I had to come to the realization Reformed theology is in scripture, whether I like it or not, ha. For me that's the bigger issue; we can argue all day about how "big" or "small" we make God, but if scripture teaches how God is and what He does with His plan of salvation, who are we to argue with it? And yeah, some people try to put too much stock in Calvinism with the person of John Calvin himself. I'm not going to dis Calvin at all (the man could theologize me under the table), but he didn't invent the doctrine, and he certainly wasn't the "pope" of it by any means. Calvinism is just a historical name for the doctrine, just as "Nestorianism" isn't necessarily tied to Nestorius himself. As for the Arminians you're dealing with, I don't know what advice I can provide specifically as I don't know the exact nature of what you're dealing with. If they're being ungracious and cruel, I wouldn't engage with them at all, to be frank. Don't throw pearls before swine, or what is holy to the dogs. If they're showing an interest and want to have honest discussions, as Whitefield and Wesley did, then by all means talk with them. If it's getting to the point where you're facing harassment or some level of abuse, I'd confront them about it, and if they don't listen, get some friends in on it. If that doesn't work, go to your pastor again, and make it clear that you've tried all avenues of approach (eg., Matthew 18) and it's getting to the point where coming to church is no longer edifying. I'm sure a lot of other Arminians out there would agree with me that the way they're treating you is disrespectful and dishonorable to God's people. I hope this helps. God bless.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : A Simple Review of \"The Cross and the Switchblade\" (Film)

Thu, 11 Feb 2016 19:01:17 +0000

Hello Edzel. I don't mind you copying parts, so long as you give me proper credit, of course :) What do you need to copy it for?

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : The Sons of Issachar Anointing

Thu, 11 Feb 2016 19:00:23 +0000

Mr. Norseman, thank you for your post; Where are you getting a "spiritual tribe of Issachar"? I know you reference Rev 7:7, but that section lists many tribes, which some commentators take as being literal members of the Jewish tribes, while others consider it to be within the body of Christ, but not with any special gifts attached to them. Where are you getting that this is a "spiritual tribe" with a special gift?

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : The Sons of Issachar Anointing

Thu, 11 Feb 2016 18:57:53 +0000

Mr. Norseman; Far as I know, your comment went through without a problem. As you can see above, it's right there. I don't know where you're getting the deletion charge.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Getting Parables Horribly Wrong: The Prodigal Son

Fri, 29 Jan 2016 23:51:33 +0000

Hello Alana. Did you actually read the article, or just see the subject and respond to it? Because I explain why the context is for the Pharisees, and why expanding it beyond that doesn't work.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Steve Kelly - Cultic Teachings on Leadership

Sun, 18 Oct 2015 18:36:19 +0000

Mark; First, my last name is not Allen. Second, the email you used to make this comment is the EXACT SAME email ( djshowstopper87@aol.com ) as the user "Will" up above. In fact, the user "Jason" uses the EXACT SAME email as you and Will. If that wasn't crazy enough, the user "Matt," who spoke with me fairly recently on this post, has the EXACT SAME email used for his posts. Why would guys named Mark, Will, Jason, and Matt, all be using djshowstopper87@aol.com? Either the owner of that email has had his account hacked several times, or these names are all the same person, trying to make it look like Wave Church has way more support than they actually do. I have to ask, why are you changing the name used in your comments? Why not just use the same name? Are you really going to come on here and lecture people on honesty and trying to "trump up drama" when you're engaging in online deceit like this? That is rank hypocrisy. I've noticed that you seem to continually make bold claims about people, either attacking the character of myself or others, and yet never back them up. I've given you the benefit of the doubt and attempted to give you a chance to respond, whatever username you're employing. Now, however, I'm going to have to ask you to refrain from posting if you're going to engage in these kinds of antics. In fact, your dishonesty and willingness to commit this sort of lying for the sake of Wave Church only supports the notion that Wave Church is, at worst, a cult, and, at best, a cult of personality. Those who love the truth DON'T need to lie for it.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : An email I wrote about Rick Warren

Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:24:41 +0000

Angela, thank you for your post! Glad I could help you out, and that you found the post edifying :)

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Steve Kelly - Cultic Teachings on Leadership

Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:16:23 +0000

(Third Part) Seventh, you say, “someone could miss out something special God has planned for them there if they simply listen to you.” I’m not going to tell someone to go to a church that I know regularly preaches heresy and teaches contrary to the plain meaning of God. In fact, they teach according to how Steve Kelly himself interprets the word of God, according to revelations given to him by God - which, again, is a sign of a cult. Let me put it this way: if I know a boy is a drinker and has a questionable past, I’m not going to tell my daughter, “Ah, go on and date him – I don’t want to miss out on something special God has planned for you!” Eighth, you say, “to say he isn't Godly and is a cult leader with no real evidence (only opinions and stories that may or may not be accurate) is not something I think is all that right.” Actually, I show he isn’t godly and a cult leader from his own theology. I emphasize it with stories (often documented, actually) of people who have been there, and can validate their experience. If you think the stories can’t be trusted, then it is actually up to you to show why they are questionable. To simply dismiss them is similar to Jehovah’s Witnesses who demand the original copies of false prophecies from the Watchtower Society, or they won’t believe them. Finally, you say I am “labeling a church or its pastor something it isn't because of your own dislike of things or the leader.” I have “labeled” a church and pastor things which I back up with evidence. I do this in my other podcasts on Wave Church, and my other discussions on them. Steve Kelly manipulates the word of God to get it to say what he wants it to say – I’ve demonstrated that over and over again. Wave Church doesn’t preach the true Gospel – I’ve demonstrated that over and over again (especially in the episode where I review the Beatles Easter message). Steve Kelly teaches the Prosperity Gospel heresy - I demonstrated that in the podcast before this one. Steve Kelly teaches a cultic doctrine of leadership – I’ve demonstrated that here, and I can validate it with other sources as well. If at any point in this response, I also seemed harsh against you, without reason, I apologize. However, I am simply trying to wake you up to what you’re doing here. If Steve Kelly really does use the word of God rightly, then please demonstrate it from the original wording, not simply repeating what Steve Kelly says. If he doesn’t preach the Prosperity Gospel heresy, then review the messages where we’ve demonstrated that and demonstrate it. If stories about how Steve Kelly manipulates people or abuses them aren’t true, then demonstrate why they’re not true. What I promise you will find, if you are honest with yourself and with the situation, is that Wave Church is a bad place for people who want to call themselves Christians. It is not a church; it is an abomination before God, lifting up a strange fire to him. Again, I encourage you to really review this situation and pray over it. God bless.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Steve Kelly - Cultic Teachings on Leadership

Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:16:09 +0000

(Second Part) Third, you say that you don’t see where Kelly is being a bully, but is just warning people about a rebel spirit – but again, that comes across as compartmentalization. When Kelly transforms stories like that of Miriam and turns it into a warning against attacking leadership, or he takes the story of Paul and Barnabas’s fight and tries to argue it’s about attacking leadership (which it most certainly IS NOT), that’s at worst using bullying and scare tactics in your sermon to sway people from questioning their leader. This doesn’t even cover the fact that, if Steve Kelly were to use his standard against great men in Church History, then Irenaeus, Athanasius, Maximos the Confessor, Martin Luther, and countless others would all be guilty of a “rebel spirit.” Fourth, you keep saying it’s okay to question leadership, but to do so respectfully. However, I have to wonder what your experience really is behind asking questions. I’ve personally known more than a few people who have been respectful and have simply attempted to use discernment (just as we are called to do in scripture), and have been yelled at, threatened with expulsion, or have had themselves talked about from the pulpit. Have you tried to REALLY question authority? I mean, ask someone about the legitimacy of the Prosperity Gospel heresy which Steve Kelly promotes? Have you tried asking about some of the false teachers, like TD Jakes, he’s brought to speak before God’s people? Have you brought up some of the questionable uses of scripture and held those people accountable to the word of God? Again, I’ve known people who have attempted this, and some have a hard time attending a church again because of what they’ve endured. This is no different than so many other megachurches out there which follow this same model of leadership. Fifth, you say to me, “you haven't been there recently or know what God has planned in the life of the church.” I don’t know how either of these points are relevant. I’ve never attended a Kingdom Hall meeting, but I know they preach heresy, and I know that what they preach goes against God’s word, and that those who attend it are under God’s judgment unless they repent and come to a knowledge of the truth. Unless Steve Kelly recently repented of the Prosperity Gospel heresy and now teaches exegetically from the word of God, I don’t see why my not being there or “not knowing what God has planned” has to do with it. Certainly nowhere in scripture does it say, “Don’t discern false teachers unless you’ve been to their church recently, or you know what God has planned for the life of the church.” That’s a completely man-made standard. Sixth, you say to me, “there are people that attend the church that feel they are being fed spiritually.” Again, this is arguing from pragmatism. There are people who attend the Mormon church who feel they are being fed spiritually. That alone doesn’t make a church right.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Steve Kelly - Cultic Teachings on Leadership

Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:15:49 +0000

(First Part) Matt; Firstly, thank you for listening to the podcast, as well taking the time to think about these things. In response to your posts, I’m going to attempt to respond one at a time, but reviewing them in context even if I don’t necessarily quote the whole thing. First, you continue to say that you’ve grown in Christ at Wave Church. If that is true, that is wonderful, and I’ve never doubted that God can draw a straight line with a crooked stick, however if any growth has occurred, it was not from Wave Church and Steve Kelly, but from the Holy Spirit. This, actually, is one of the signs of a cult: when people attribute their spiritual power and growth to an individual or an organization rather than to God or a divine source. Again, I’m not denying God can use heretical sources to save people (I know someone who got saved reading the Jehovah’s Witness translation), but that God can use a crooked stick doesn’t make the stick any less crooked. To argue that something is good because there are results is to in essence make the fallacy of arguing from pragmatism. Second, you say that, while you agree with me on Kelly’s questionable use of scripture, you don’t think his overall teaching is cultish or biblically unsound. While I’m not trying to psychoanalyze you or judge your thoughts, this kind of assumption comes across, at least from the opposite end where I sit, as a bit of compartmentalization. Steve Kelly took passages of scripture and completely mishandled them to in essence teach that you NEED to obey and not be offended by your leader, or God will judge you. This comes from a teaching by John Bevere, in his book “Under Cover,” that those who disobey their pastors are under God’s judgment, to the point that God will strike them with sickness and harm until they repent of it. (I am NOT making this up.) While I agree that Christians should be respectful to their pastors and listen to them, Kelly & Co. go well beyond this. The fact that Kelly manipulates Matthew 11:6 into being about earthly pastors rather than about Christ, which the passage was CLEARLY about, only further emphasizes this. There is really no way to defend that. The only other people I’ve heard who take passages talking about God and transforming it into about earthly authorities are…well…cults.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Steve Kelly - Cultic Teachings on Leadership

Tue, 28 Jul 2015 05:30:43 +0000

Matt; The issue is that this is what I constantly experience from people who attempt to support Wave Church and Steve Kelly: compartmentalization, arguments repeated ad nauseum (with no attempt, nor ability, to adjust in the face of counterargument), and an inability to defend their leaders' use of scripture. And I hate to say it, but when members of a religious body perform those sort of things, that's often one of the telltale signs of a cult. What I've gotten from you is that you most likely have not really listened to the podcast, let alone the other podcasts/blogposts I've done, where I document further eisegetical and doctrinal errors. If you really think there is truth behind Wave Church, then I invite you to go and listen to those, and to really study what scripture says, not simply what Steve Kelly tells you it says. If you still wish to discuss the matter, then please discuss the substance of the discussion, not merely the subject.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Steve Kelly - Cultic Teachings on Leadership

Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:14:15 +0000

Matt, with all due respect, you say, "Sorry to repeat what others said," and then proceed to repeat your previous arguments, most of which have been addressed above. Again, I don't know what else to say when I've already said it, and there isn't an accommodation to the counter-arguments given. I suggest you read previous responses to better adjust to those who criticize Wave Church. Now in regards to Matthew 11:6 (which you respond to in a second comment below), you say: "He was using the verse to say that people shouldn't be offended by leaders/ pastors who preaching the good news/ teachings of Christ. He wasn't directly saying he or leaders were Christ or anything like that." This forgets a few things which I clearly outline in the podcast above: 1) Steve Kelly's flow of thought in the passage is complete eisegesis. He argues that John the Baptist is getting offended by "leadership style," when that wasn't at all what Christ was talking about, which was the fact he was affirming his status as the Messiah. 2) When Christ says in Matthew 11:6 "blessed is he who does not take offense at Me," Christ is talking about himself, not other leaders. Again, as I brought up in the podcast, when Christ uses the words "I" or "me," he's not speaking about anyone else. For Steve Kelly to use this to say "people shouldn't be offended by leaders/ pastors" is to COMPLETELY abuse the passage in a way that is just disgusting. Again, if you have a problem with this, or you want to make the contention I'm not treating his lesson fairly, then go to the word of God, go to the passage, and show me that Steve Kelly handled it rightly.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Steve Kelly - Cultic Teachings on Leadership

Sun, 26 Jul 2015 21:16:40 +0000

Matt, thank you for your post; All of your comments have actually been answered ad nauseum in previous comments made here. In fact, many of them are near copies of Jason's post above, as well as those made by Will and Afric. I'm not really sure how to respond when I would only be repeating myself. I will say I find it very telling that Wave Church supporters are unable to do little more than rattle off repeated arguments (many of which, I have been told by former staff members, people at Wave Church are told to repeat by the leaders) rather than changing their presentation in the face of counter-arguments. However, I will give you what I give everyone who comes on here and claims that Steve Kelly's teachings are biblically sound: Can you please go to Matthew 11:6 and show, from the context, that Christ is speaking about pastors, let alone leaders, as Steve Kelly interprets in the audio reviewed in this podcast. If Steve Kelly's teachings are biblically sound, as you claim, this shouldn't be too much of a problem.

http://designofprovidence.blogspot.com/ : Steve Kelly - Cultic Teachings on Leadership

Fri, 5 Jun 2015 01:29:58 +0000

Jason, thank you for your post; I am not certain if you've looked at the previous conversations in this combox, or have reviewed some of my other podcasts on Wave Church, but I've addressed some of your contentions there. However, out of respect for your contention, let me address some of your points. 1) You say that the motives of Frank and myself are not "Christian like," because (I assume) we are "going to a church and actively looking to pick apart a pastor's message." That's a rather major character charge coming from an oversimplification of the situation. Frank and I were not walking into any random church and LOOKING to attack a pastor. Rather, we are responding to leaders of large churches who are grossly mishandling the word of God (and Mr. Rue was even speaking from the personal experience of he and his wife at a Wave Network church). You say that I'm "just picking apart one of Steve Kelly's messages and saying the church isn't biblically sound." Actually, I did a podcast before this on another Steve Kelly message, in which he clearly proclaimed the Prosperity Gospel heresy. I've also done podcasts after this on Wave Church and Steve Kelly, further emphasizing just how badly Steve Kelly handles scripture. This podcast is not coming out of a vacuum. Again, Mr. Rue's experience certainly didn't come out of one time - he was actually a member of a Wave Network church. 2) You say "the teachings are sound." I've demonstrated in various podcasts that Steve Kelly is teaching heresy; not only the Prosperity Gospel, but the same error taught by John Bevere and others. I also did an examination of the Beatles Easter service Wave Church did a few years back, and demonstrated that the "Gospel" presented in it was no Gospel at all. If, however, you believe Kelly's doctrines regarding those positions are sound, then feel free to demonstrate so. 3) You say that Steve Kelly and other pastors "encourage members to check behind them during their messages." I've never heard them say this (and yes, I've listened to dozens of Steve Kelly messages), but let's assume, for the sake of conversation, that they have. Checking their messages is what is what I have done here, and you're condemning me for it. Also, you say that you "do this often" and you "don't see a problem." Very well, I invite you to go through this podcast, examine every scripture that Steve Kelly uses, and DEMONSTRATE that he is using it rightly. If that seems too daunting a task for you, then I give you only one verse of scripture: Matthew 11:6. Demonstrate to me that for Steve Kelly to apply this not to Jesus but to ALL PASTORS is a correct handling of that verse. If what you are saying is correct, then there should be no major problem with Steve Kelly's handling of that passage. I've asked other defenders of Wave Church to support Steve Kelly's handling of Matthew 11:6, and have thus far never received an answer; hopefully, you can present one. 4) You state: "If there were repeated times where Steve Kelly misused scripture, don't you think more members and staff would call him out on it?" Actually, there WERE times when people called him out on it; they were either ostracized or they were kicked out/fired from the staff. Mr. Rue discusses this, and I've personally met and spoken with people who have experienced this. The fact is, Steve Kelly's style of leadership (which amounts to a cult of personality) forbids any possible questioning of how the lead pastor handles scripture. Again, I've discussed this in other episodes (especially the one with Steve Kelly's visit to the 700 Club). I encourage you to prayerfully consider all this.