MSNBC: Revivalist Claims Hundred's of Healings

[Fergasun]

Linky-linky-bo-binky! (http://fieldnotes.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/29/1075189.aspx)
LAKELAND, Fla. – "Holy Spirit fall! God is here! We want more! More, more, more!" That's what Canadian evangelist Todd Bentley yells out nearly every evening to the thousands who gather to hear him preach. The 32-year-old Bentley looks more like a biker than a minister, with body piercings and tattoos all over his arms and neck. But the crowds don't seem to mind how he looks. They just want what they believe Bentley has – the ability to heal them.
Bentley claims that God has used him to supernaturally heal hundreds of people of diseases ranging from glaucoma to diabetes to even cancer. How to explain it? Bentley said in an interview that he doesn't know exactly why now, why him, why Lakeland, and he does not promise that everyone who comes to him will be healed. But he does maintain a pragmatic posture toward prayer. "I say, you have nothing to lose but your sickness. If the doctors can't help you, why wouldn't you give God a chance?"This guy has been to my church a bunch of times... tats up and down the arm... check out the picture but he's pretty cool. He always had this fire shirt that he wore. Actually disappeared for 2 years because I think he had a nervous breakdown on the pulpit. I've been hearing about this the past month and glad that people outside of church finally noticed.

I definately believe that these types of miracles can happen... I'd really like to know why the doubting guy says, "I don't think it fits into any branch of Christianity..." as if Jesus and his disciples never performed any types of healings or miracles... if it happened then it definately happens now.

[techboy]

Corcaigh, your fans are all counting on you for a really good, biting, sarcastic comment, here. Don't let us down. I know you're probably pretty tired after all the other religious threads you've had to read and respond to recently, but you're supersmart, and I just know you'll fight your guts out. :)

[Thiebear]

My one and only question would be:
IF its a gift from God for him to heal people, why don't they all get healed.
When Jesus did it, it didnt talk about hit or miss, nor if they believed in him or not...
did it?

[techboy]

When Jesus did it, it didnt talk about hit or miss, nor if they believed in him or not...
did it?

1. This guy is not Jesus.
2. When Jesus performed miracles, it was always about glorifying God and witnessing to His authority. The healing/exorcism/whatever was always secondary. This is why He didn't heal everyone He met.
3. I tend to be highly skeptical of claims like this, so while since I believe in God I have to acknowledge that it is possible that these healings are God at work, I also have to acknowledge the possibility that these healings are psychosomatic or the result of normal remission. A lot more evidence would have to be provided one way or the other, especially since as the critic (Wilde, I think?) has quipped, we see a lot of wheelchairs and crutches left behind at such things, but rarely glass eyes or prosthetic limbs.

And to answer the OPs question about why some Christians don't believe prophecy, healing, and tongues go on today, google "cessationism".

I see two possibilities:

1. Cessationism is true, in one of its forms.
2. Cessationism is false, but as not everyone has every gift, cessationists are people that all don't have the Charismatic gifts, and they all gathered together into cessationist denominations, reinforcing their own impressions.

As for my personal opinion on this issue, it is:

This is from The Essential Doctrines of the Christian Faith (Part 1):A Historical Approach (http://www.equip.org/free/JAE100-1.htm) by Norman L. Geisler (I think the link's dead now):


A historical approach to the topic of the essentials of the faith begins with the earliest creeds embedded in the New Testament and traces creedal development through the early forms of the Apostles’ Creed to the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed. Unity among all major sections of Christendom is found in the statement: “One Bible, two testaments, three confessions, four councils, and five centuries.” From here there are divergent views, such as Eastern Orthodoxy’s acceptance of seven general church councils and Roman Catholicism’s acceptance of twenty-one. Anabaptists reject the authority of any church council but accept in general the doctrines that were declared at the first four councils, based on their belief in sola scriptura (“the Bible alone”).

The essential doctrines of the Christian faith that emerge from this historical approach are those contained in the Apostles’ Creed and unfolded in subsequent creeds of the first five centuries. These include (1) human depravity, (2) Christ’s virgin birth, (3) Christ’s sinlessness, (4) Christ’s deity, (5) Christ’s humanity, (6) God’s unity, (7) God’s triunity, (8) the necessity of God’s grace, (9) the necessity of faith, (10) Christ’s atoning death, (11) Christ’s bodily resurrection, (12) Christ’s bodily ascension, (13) Christ’s present High Priestly service, and (14) Christ’s second coming, final judgment, and reign. Heaven and hell are implied in the final judgment and are explicated in later creeds.

In the essentials, unity. In the non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.

[techboy]

I'd really like to know why the doubting guy says, "I don't think it fits into any branch of Christianity..."

By the way, you should probably read THE COUNTERFEIT REVIVAL* (Part One): RODNEY HOWARD-BROWNE AND
THE "TORONTO BLESSING" (http://www.equip.org/atf/cf/%7B9C4EE03A-F988-4091-84BD-F8E70A3B0215%7D/DP244-1.pdf).

I don't know if this guy uses similar methods or is genuine and orthodox, but if so, that would be an explanation of this comment.

[Zguy28]

Lakeland Revival: Todd Bentley, Bob Jones, and some things to consider (http://pjmiller.wordpress.com/2008/05/08/lakeland-revival-todd-bentley-bob-jones-and-some-things-to-consider/)


Some commentary on the article is here:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=112969


I wouldn't trust Todd Bentley or the other "Kansas City prophets." :2cents:

[Zguy28]

Todd Friel comments on Todd Bentley (http://pjmiller.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/way-of-the-master-on-lakeland-and-todd-bentley/)

w/ video.

[Corcaigh]

Lest there be any confusion here, my contempt and criticism for people like this is in no way contempt and criticism of the Christian faith.

This story is about an ex-drunk, ex-druggie, convicted sex criminal (for molesting a seven year old boy) with no medical knowledge, claiming to 'heal' people in a tent.:doh:

This is just another version of Benny Hinn, but without the cosmetic surgery and makeover. He practices the same brand of charlatanry to the desperate and the gullible for financial gain.

Me ... I'll keep paying those costly insurance premiums and getting treatment when needed from these so-called medical professionals who spent years developing their skills and knowledge. But I'm naive like that.

[Zguy28]

This story is about an ex-drunk, ex-druggie, convicted sex criminal (for molesting a seven year old boy) with no medical knowledge healing people in a tent.:doh:After going to the second link I posted and watching the video, I have to wonder if he is ex- anything.

[Corcaigh]

After going to the second link I posted and watching the video, I have to wonder if he is ex- anything.

I didn't know about the 'ex' ... but was giving him the benefit of the doubt. :)

[Smoot Point Really]

For those who are truly interested and want to take the time to investigate an Eastern Orthodox opinion on this subject, you can go this link:

Charismatic Revival as a Sign of the Times, By Father Seraphim Rose (http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/charismatic_revival_s_rose_e.htm)

This is one section of the book "Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future" by Father Seraphim Rose.

It was written in the 1970s/80s and was way ahead of its time. It is particularly interesting when he compares the techniques used by charismatics to the same techniques present in seances and other forms of mediumism.

Anyway, those interested should read the whole article but here is an excerpt from what I described:


The best-known form of mediumism in the modern West is the spiritistic seance, where contact is made with certain forces that produce observable effects such as knockings, voices, various kinds of communications such as automatic writing and speaking in unknown tongues, the moving of objects, and the apparition of hands and "human" figures that can sometimes be photographed. These effects are produced with the aid of definite attitudes and techniques on the part of those present, concerning which we shall here quote one of the standard textbooks on the subject [8].

1. Passivity: "A spirit's activity is measured by the degree of passivity or submissiveness which he finds in the sensitive, or medium." "Mediumship... by diligent cultivation may be attained by anyone who deliberately yields up his body, with his free will, and sensitive and intellectual faculties, to an invading or controlling spirit."

2. Solidarity in faith: All present must have a "sympathetic attitude of mind in support of the medium"; the spiritistic phenomena are "facilitated by a certain sympathy arising from a harmony of ideas, views and sentiment existing between the experimenters and the medium. When this sympathy and harmony, as well as the personal surrender of the will, are warring in the members of the 'circle,' the seance proves a failure." Also, "the number of experimenters is of great importance. If larger, they impede the harmony so necessary for success."

3. All present "join hands to form the so-called magnetic circle. By this closed circuit, each member contributes the energy of a certain force which is collectively communicated to the medium." However, the "magnetic circle" is required only in less well-developed mediums. Mme. Blavarsky, the founder of modern "theosophy," herself a medium, later laughed at the crude techniques of spiritism when she encountered much more powerful mediums in the East, to which category also belongs the fakir described in Chapter 3.

4. The necessary spiritistic atmosphere is commonly induced by artificial means, such as the singing of hymns, the playing of soft music, and even the offering of prayer."

The spiritistic seance, to be sure, is a rather crude form of mediumism - although for that very reason its techniques are all the more evident - and only rarely does it produce spectacular results. There are other more subtle forms, some of them going under the name of "Christian." To realize this one need only look at the techniques of a "faith-healer" such as Oral Roberts (who until joining the Methodist church a few years ago was a minister of the Pentecostal Holiness sect), who causes "miraculous" healings by forming an actual "magnetic circle" composed of people with the proper sympathy, passivity, and harmony of "faith" who put their hands on the television set while he is on the air; the healings can even be brought about by drinking a glass of water that has been placed on the television set and has thus absorbed the flow of mediumistic forces that have been brought into action. But such healings, like those produced by spiritism and witchcraft, can take a heavy toll in later psychic, not to mention spiritual, disorders [9].

In this realm one must be very careful, because the devil is constantly aping the works of God, and many people with mediumistic gifts continue to think they are Christians and that their gifts come from the Holy Spirit. But is it possible to say that this is true of the "charismatic revival" - that it is in fact, as some say, primarily a form of mediumism?

In applying the most obvious tests for mediumism to the "charismatic revival," one is struck first of all by the fact that the chief prerequisites for the spiritistic seance described above are all present at "charismatic" prayer meetings, whereas not one of these characteristics is present in the same form or degree in the true Christian worship of the Orthodox Church.

1. The "passivity" of the spiritistic seance corresponds to what "charismatic" writers call "a kind of letting go... This involves more than the dedication of one's conscious existence through an act of will; it also refers to a large, even hidden area of one's unconscious life...All that can be done is to offer the self - body, mind, and even the tongue - so that the Spirit of God may have full possession... Such persons are ready - the barriers are down and God moves mightily upon and through their whole being" (Williams, pp. 62-63; italics in the original). Such a "spiritual" attitude is not that of Christianity: it is rather the attitude of Zen Buddhism, Eastern "mysticism," hypnosis, and spiritism. Such an exaggerated passivity is entirely foreign to Orthodox spirituality, and is only an open invitation to the activity of deceiving spirits. One sympathetic observer notes that at Pentecostal meetings people speaking in tongues or interpreting "seem almost to go into a trance" (Sherrill, p. 87). This passivity is so pronounced in some "charismatic" communities that they completely abolish the church organization and any set order of services and do absolutely everything as the "spirit" directs.

2 There is a definite "solidarity in faith" - and not merely solidarity in Christian faith and hope for salvation, but a specific unanimity in the desire for and expectation of "charismatic" phenomena. This is true of all "charismatic" prayer meetings; but an even more pronounced solidarity is required for the experience of the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit," which is usually performed in a small separate room in the presence of only a few who have already had the experience. The presence of even one person who has negative thoughts about the experience is often sufficient to cause the "Baptism" not to occur - exactly in the way that the misgivings and the prayer of the Orthodox priest described above was enough to break up the impressive illusion produced by the Ceylonese fakir.

3. The spiritistic "magnetic circle" corresponds to the Pentecostal "laying on of hands," which is always done by those who themselves have already experienced the "Baptism" with speaking in tongues, and who serve, in the words of Pentecostals themselves, as "channels of the Holy Spirit" (Williams, p. 64) - a word used by spiritists to refer to mediums.

4. The "charismatic," like the spiritistic, "atmosphere" is induced by means of suggestive hymns and prayers, and often also by hand-clapping, all of which give "an effect of mounting excitement, and almost intoxicating quality" (Sherrill, p. 23).

It may still be objected that all those similarities between mediumism and Pentecostalism are only coincidental; and indeed in order to show whether or not the "charismatic revival" is actually mediumistic, we shall have to determine what kind of "spirit" it is that is communicated through the Pentecostal "channels." A number of testimonies by those who have experienced it - and who believe that it is the Holy Spirit - point clearly to its nature. "The group moved closer around me. It was as if they were forming with their bodies a funnel through which was concentrated the flow of the Spirit that was pulsing through the room. It flowed into me as I sat there" (Sherrill, p. 122). At a Catholic Pentecostal prayer meeting, "upon entering a room one was practically struck dead by the strong visible presence of God" (Ranaghan, p. 79). (Compare the "vibrant" atmosphere at some pagan and Hindu rites; see above, pg. 50.) Another man describes his "Baptismal" experience: "I became aware that the Lord was in the room and that He was approaching me. I couldn't see Him, but I felt myself being pushed over on my back. I seemed to float to the floor..." (Logos Journal, Nov.-Dec., 1971, p. 47). Other similar examples will be given below in the discussion of the physical accompaniments of "charismatic" experience. This "pulsing," "visible," "pushing" spirit that "approaches" and "flows" would seem to confirm the mediumistic character of the "charismatic" movement. Certainly the Holy Spirit could never be described in these ways!

[Zguy28]

For those who are truly interested and want to take the time to investigate an Eastern Orthodox opinion on this subject, you can go this link:

Charismatic Revival as a Sign of the Times, By Father Seraphim Rose (http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/charismatic_revival_s_rose_e.htm)

This is one section of the book "Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future" by Father Seraphim Rose.

It was written in the 1970s/80s and was way ahead of its time. It is particularly interesting when he compares the techniques used by charismatics to the same techniques present in seances and other forms of mediumism.

Anyway, those interested should read the whole article but here is an excerpt from what I described:How cool would it be to have a name like Seraphim? :cool:

[Vicious]

GREAT I guess we can stop spending all this money on medical research

[prophet]

I actually know Todd personally, he is "different, but he is a great guy'.

Do people get healed in the meetings? Yes.
6 years ago discovery channel did a program on him, and the healings.... It was actually quite good.

Let's remember he directs all the attention to God. He will not say Todd heals anyone.

I find people who question the "gifts for today". Have been taught their whole life that it has passed, and therefore have never witness Gods grace in this area. It's almost like God has become weak for some reason in the past centuries. But for the first "8000" years of biblical history He was who He said He is an "Almighty God". Somehow God lost His power?

Doctrinally I have had my questions myself, and Todd has had to reevaluate some things he believed & taught. That is why he took the 1 year sabatical. I would say most people's doctrine has changed while growing in the faith.

With all that said; I think excess, hype, and hysteria end up discrediting "the real" I believe that there is real healings taking place, but extreme stupidness including by "Todd" end up making it look silly. Charismatic Revival tends to start off great, and it ends up Crazimatic Revival.

[prophet]

By the way, you should probably read THE COUNTERFEIT REVIVAL* (Part One): RODNEY HOWARD-BROWNE AND
THE "TORONTO BLESSING" (http://www.equip.org/atf/cf/%7B9C4EE03A-F988-4091-84BD-F8E70A3B0215%7D/DP244-1.pdf).

I don't know if this guy uses similar methods or is genuine and orthodox, but if so, that would be an explanation of this comment.
While we are being weary of everyone.. I think Hank should be added to that list. He discredits himself by his lifestyle, and actions as well.


http://www.cultlink.com/ar/cristat.htm

http://www.apostasyalert.org/Bible-Answer-Man_Traitor.htm

[Zguy28]

I actually know Todd personally, he is "different, but he is a great guy'.

Do people get healed in the meetings? Yes.
6 years ago discovery channel did a program on him, and the healings.... It was actually quite good.

Let's remember he directs all the attention to God. He will not say Todd heals anyone.

I find people who question the "gifts for today". Have been taught their whole life that it has passed, and therefore have never witness Gods grace in this area. It's almost like God has become weak for some reason in the past centuries. But for the first "8000" years of biblical history He was who He said He is an "Almighty God". Somehow God lost His power?

Doctrinally I have had my questions myself, and Todd has had to reevaluate some things he believed & taught. That is why he took the 1 year sabatical. I would say most people's doctrine has changed while growing in the faith.

With all that said; I think excess, hype, and hysteria end up discrediting "the real" I believe that there is real healings taking place, but extreme stupidness including by "Todd" end up making it look silly. Charismatic Revival tends to start off great, and it ends up Crazimatic Revival.
I have trouble believing that a woman's tumor exploded out of her knee and slid down the side of her leg. Sorry.

[techboy]

While we are being weary of everyone.. I think Hank should be added to that list. He discredits himself by his lifestyle, and actions as well.

That's interesting. I'll have to investigate this. He's still right on in that article, though.

*EDIT* Nope, not buying it. All I see is unsubstantiated accusations on websites with questionable credibility. Financially, CRI is in good standing with the ERFCA (http://www.ecfa.org/MemberProfile.aspx?ID=6405), and the rest seems to be blowback from the fact that Hank is not afraid to take on heresy and bad doctrine within the Church as well as without.

This is from a reprint of an article in the LA Times which I found on one of the sites you linked.


"He's the watchdog who keeps religious broadcasters on their toes," said Stephen Winzenburg, communications scholar at Grand View College in Des Moines, Iowa, who has studied religious broadcasters for 20 years. "He wants to publicly point out the inconsistencies of religious broadcasters." Hanegraaff was extremely critical of the recent hysteria surrounding the millennium and outright dismissed the preachers who hawked hysterical apocalyptic visions of the turn of the century. "If Christians aren't credible with current events, then how can they be relied on to speak credibly about events that happened 2,000 years ago, like the resurrection of Christ?" said Hanegraaff.

Winzenburg applauds Hanegraaff's role in the Christian community: "You don't have fellow Christians keeping their leaders accountable," he said. Hanegraaff even had a hand in the Pasadena-based Worldwide Church of God's conversion to mainstream evangelical Christianity in 1994 after meeting with leaders to implore them to return to a Biblically based interpretation of Christianity. But a lack of accountability from Hanegraaff is exactly the problem, according to the Martin family.

"The Bible Answer Man needs to set a positive example for Biblical accountability," said Rische. "This is not the case with Hank Hanegraaff, and CRI is better off without the negative notoriety Hank generates." But officials at CRI say Hanegraaff is doggedly continuing the work of Walter Martin.

His doctrine is rock solid, his theology is sound, and he's not afraid to take on those within the Church that stray from the essentials, as well as those outside. He has positive associations with many people I greatly respect.

I know many Christians don't like him, but it's usually for the reasons that I do like him.

[rebornempowered]

That's interesting. I'll have to investigate this. He's still right on in that article, though.

*EDIT* Nope, not buying it. All I see is unsubstantiated accusations on websites with questionable credibility. Financially, CRI is in good standing with the ERFCA (http://www.ecfa.org/MemberProfile.aspx?ID=6405), and the rest seems to be blowback from the fact that Hank is not afraid to take on heresy and bad doctrine within the Church as well as without.

This is from a reprint of an article in the LA Times which I found on one of the sites you linked.



His doctrine is rock solid, his theology is sound, and he's not afraid to take on those within the Church that stray from the essentials, as well as those outside. He has positive associations with many people I greatly respect.

I know many Christians don't like him, but it's usually for the reasons that I do like him.

Thanks for posting this. Interesting that of the two links above one is dead and the other is from a dude who is related to someone who was being sued by Hank and/or CRI. Not saying suing is right but get me a better link.

It is also interesting that most of these attacks have come on him since Counterfeit Revival and since he starting speaking out on dispensationalism. Hmmmmmm.......

[Zguy28]

Thanks for posting this. Interesting that of the two links above one is dead and the other is from a dude who is related to someone who was being sued by Hank and/or CRI. Not saying suing is right but get me a better link.

It is also interesting that most of these attacks have come on him since Counterfeit Revival and since he starting speaking out on dispensationalism. Hmmmmmm.......No kidding. If Hank is guilty of anything its not being the most loving or kind Christian in the world.

Other than that, he's as sound as they come.

[prophet]

I have trouble believing that a woman's tumor exploded out of her knee and slid down the side of her leg. Sorry.
I have no clue if or how it happened. But Like I said before I do know the guy, and I know him not to be a liar.

But I guess the same question could be posed to you.

If you lived in the days of Jesus, and it was said that he walked on water.... but you didn't see it would you doubt it as well?

[prophet]

That's interesting. I'll have to investigate this. He's still right on in that article, though.

*EDIT* Nope, not buying it. All I see is unsubstantiated accusations on websites with questionable credibility. Financially, CRI is in good standing with the ERFCA (http://www.ecfa.org/MemberProfile.aspx?ID=6405), and the rest seems to be blowback from the fact that Hank is not afraid to take on heresy and bad doctrine within the Church as well as without.

This is from a reprint of an article in the LA Times which I found on one of the sites you linked.



His doctrine is rock solid, his theology is sound, and he's not afraid to take on those within the Church that stray from the essentials, as well as those outside. He has positive associations with many people I greatly respect.

I know many Christians don't like him, but it's usually for the reasons that I do like him.
He did get hammered of misused finanices.. it was about 3 years ago. And he did sue a fellow "christian" which is against what we are taught.

The whole article on the LA times is gone now, but this is what I did find on the article.
William Lobdell writes in the Los Angeles Times:

The dispute is another in a string of controversies surrounding Hanegraaff, who is best known as a Christian purist who holds pastors, churches and denominations accountable for teaching Bible-based Christianity. Nine years ago, another group of former employees who banded together as the "Group for CRI Accountability" accused Hanegraaff of abusive leadership, misuse of donor money and other transgressions. In 2000, the widow of institute founder Walter Martin called for Hanegraaff's resignation, citing similar concerns. During the latest tempest, at least six employees have been fired or have resigned from a staff of about 50, former workers say. Those employees said the ministry routinely used donations to pay for Hanegraaff's personal expenses and luxury items, including a board-approved 2003 Lexus sports car and smaller items. They also said he paid his wife a large salary although she spent little time in the office and her role was unknown to most employees.


http://atheism.about.com/b/2003/08/20/hank-hanegraaff-financial-irregularities.htm

I think Hank has done alot of good, but he has also done his share of damage as well. He tends to throw the baby out with the bathwater all to often.

And I find it ironic that he bashes the WOF teaching, yet he lives the same lavish lifestyle. :2cents:

To hypocritical for my taste.

[techboy]

prophet, the only factual information I have on the matter regarding finances and lavish spending is that CRI is in good standing with the ERFCA. Everything else is simply allegations, usually by people with an axe to grind, such as atheism.about.com, or groups that Hank Hanegraaff has (rightly) called on the carpet for their departure from sound doctrine (or people who don't like that he does so).

On the other hand, I know from listening and reading for a long time that Hank Hanegraaff's theology and doctrine are 100% rock solid. Further, he is endorsed and supported by others I trust and respect.

For instance, please see Dr. Norman Geisler's: A Friendly Response to Hank Hanegraaff's Book, The Last Disciple (http://www.normangeisler.net/lastdisciple.htm). From the first paragraph (emphasis mine):


There are many reasons I am writing this congenial response to Hank's recent views expressed in The Last Disciple. First of all, Hank and I are long time friends and have discussed this topic many times. Second, we both agree that the issue here is not one of orthodoxy vs. unorthodoxy since no great fundamental of the Faith is being denied on either side. We are both fighting in the same orthodox trench against the same unorthodox enemies of the Faith. Third, I have been a faithful defender of Hank against the many false charges leveled against him and have thereby earned the right to offer some friendly criticism of his view. Fourth, Hank knows I have a strong commitment to the premillennial futurist view opposed in The Last Disciple. Indeed, the imminent premillennial view has been a treasured part of Southern Evangelical Seminary's doctrinal statement from the very beginning. As president, I have been asked by numerous constituents whether I agree with Hank's position. In brief, my answer is that we agree on all the essentials of the Faith, but on the question of the last days Hank knows I do not agree with his opposition to the futurist view. Hence, as long-time friends, we just agree to disagree agreeably. It is in this spirit that I offer a friendly response to his book The Last Disciple (hereafter "LD") and statements on it taken primarily from the interview (hereafter designated "I") printed on the CRI web site (http://www.equip.org/abouthank/tyndale.pdf accessed on 1/20/05). In all fairness, Hank promises a fuller expression of his position in a forthcoming book. But based on what he has written, my comments will be listed after the citations from Hank Hanegraaff's statements.

When I consider the (explicit or implicit) endorsement of people I trust like Dr. Geisler (and many others that appear with Hank Hanegraaff on his radio show, or at conferences, like Lee Strobel), along with what I personally know about his theology, doctrine, and ministry, as well as the only hard data available regarding the allegations against him (and the possible motivations of those making the allegations), I just can't accept what you're suggesting.

I'll keep my eyes open, of course (as I always do)...

[Fergasun]

I attend Harvest Rock Church, and I know my pastor and church also have come under fire from places like CRI. At the same time I'd invite anyone who doubts to review the message outlines (http://harvestrockchurch.org/message_outlines.php), which are available online and go back as far as 2005 from our Pastor, Che Ahn. Although I think some might find 10-15% objectional (mostly about the Holy Spirit being active). I will say one thing my wife and I found objectionable was claims that Jesus was from a wealthy family... that just doesn't fit in with the picture at all...

I actually find all of the second hand information and heresay kind've disheartening... but no surprise. I guess the truth is that people get hurt and wounded in churches all over, not just "charismatic/pentecostal" churches, but also traditional churches as well. To be honest I've never been to a healing service where the healer didn't say, "get it confirmed by your doctor" and my pastor never says, "we don't need doctors"... the basic premise is that "Jesus also heals...".

Its true, sometimes I have a problem with some of the people that come to my church because I don't know if they think of themselves as performers... who can tell man's hearts? At the same time I have to trust that they are honest believers as well and trying to build up the body of Christ. I have to feel the same way about Hank Hanagraff, even if we disagree about the same 10-15% of Christian doctrine regarding the Holy Spirit being active today. To be honest, I don't follow Bob Jones, Todd Bentley or Che Ahn, I follow Jesus. I don't read everything Bob Jones, Hank Hanagraff, Patricia King or whoever else writes... I read the Bible. To be honest I've never read Rick Joyner's book, and to be honest I had a problem with one of the Pastor's who recently spoke at my church... one from Singapore who I guess is forming a relationship with my pastor. This pastor gave a great message, but I found out his wife was a famous singer in Singapore... there's no problem with that... but she made a raunchy music video full of suggestive dances... okay that doesn't seem Christian.

I guess all of this kind've reinforces that Bible verse where Paul is in the prison, and some are preaching the Gospel for their own gain or other wrong motives, and Paul says something like, "I don't care, as long as they are preaching Jesus." So even if Todd Bentley, Bob Jones, and that whole movement are teaching from wrong hearts, or motives... I don't care, since for the most part I've found they teach and pray for people to become followers of Jesus, not followers of men.

[prophet]

I like Che! I saw him out here a few months back at one of the churches under his leadership.

---------------