Personal opinion-wise, I like Joyce Meyers, to an extent. She's kinda like the little engine that said "I can, I can".
it looks like pretty standard protocol these days to rip anyone who is successful financially in preaching. I dont see the big deal. Nobody knocks CEO's or other organization leaders, who need to move around a lots with security, but preachers arent entitled to it right? thats hogwash and BS
I consider anyone who is financially successful in preaching suspect. I don't consider Joyce Meyers a "preacher" though, or a true "spiritual leader" in Christianity. She's a seemingly decent person who's running a successful business.
I'm not discounting wealth an outcome of preaching, but I don't really see that those who taught, spoke for God or said they did, or "preached" in the bible, were ever wealthy to the tune that "preachers" often hum today. They clearly needed better financial advice. (the quoted record about Jesus, implying he drank and ate in ways that were inappropriate is a gross misrepresentation of what that verse means, but that doesn't stop people from using it to make excuses for all manner of bad behavior).
David was wealthy but he wasn't a preacher, he was a King. Before that he was a shepherd of his father's flocks. I can see the religious people, like prophets, of the O.T. doing alright by themselves in different ways but hardly to the extent that the successful Televangelist of today lives.
It's unseemly and uncharacteristic of someone who considers themselves a Christian leader to amass huge amounts of personal wealth when the world is full of the poor and dying. A simple case can be made that it's immoral for one person to always have more than they need when others have nothing.
That might sound very "60's", very idealistic and vaguely evil. Can't a person work and have what they want?
Of course. It works out if I compare a Christian Leader who becomes wealthy off their religious service to say, a CEO who's primary purpose in work is to turn a profit for their company, investors, shareholders, etc.
That's the crux of it - the CEO, CFO or COO can honestly say, "I'm running a business here and the purpose is to make money, as much as I can for this company. I'll do it honestly and as humanely as possible but the goal here is to make lots of money." Their service is to the profit.
A Christian Leader who takes the stage under the cover of the Name of God isn't giving their service for the money, they're doing it for God, and to further His purposes and profit.
I guess some Christian Leaders will say, well, part of God's purpose is to make me wealthy, what's wrong with that?
My impression is it speaks to the character of the person and the depth of their relationship with their work if they keep it.
I'm all for people doing well, having what they need and enjoying life. But when religion and business mix, it's a bust. Making money for personal gain off the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ is wrong, because it's not our money when it comes in, it's "Gods" money, earned by the service of Jesus Christ. Writing books and walking around on a stage talking about what someone else did - what's that really worth?
But yes, I do appreciate some of what I've heard from Joyce Meyers, she says some good things and seems to want to help others have a good life.
I'm all for people doing well, having what they need and enjoying life. But when religion and business mix, it's a bust. Making money for personal gain off the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ is wrong, because it's not our money when it comes in, it's "Gods" money, earned by the service of Jesus Christ. Writing books and walking around on a stage talking about what someone else did - what's that really worth?
Doesn't it ALL belong to God anyway? Isn't it just a loaner to us, whether preacher or CEO?
Nothing is ever all good or all bad, Socks. The good is what grabs people in and keeps them there. Even TWI had good and wasn't all bad (at least while I was still around--ha).
Honestly, we get deceived by the good.
I don't want Joyce Meyer's to disapper. I'd just like her to realize she doesn't DESERVE this stuff because of what she does. None of us do, but that little message, which is delivered via her lifestyle, is very deceiving.
Oldies, I don't care who Jesus ate with, that's not the point.
I don't read about Jesus amassing a material kingdom here on earth. He didn't go around in his motorcoach, latest harley, buying up property, making a compound with lots of buildings, or building a castle, or whatever wealthy people did back then - amass sheep?
Jesus Christ preached a spiritual kingdom coming - that was his message - that all are welcome - follow Him.
He himself said it is very hard for a rich man to enter the coming kingdom.
I agree - what we see here is Americanized Christianity.
There is no difference between the amassing of wealth of these televangelists and the vatican amassing their wealth. None.
It is a marriage with the world, it is creating an earthy, material kingdom, it is a making merchandise of God's people. It is enriching themselves and gorging themselves on the backs of their flock.
It is disgusting.
The way I see it, it isn't the accumulation of wealth that matters, but how one uses it. Money is not the root of all evil; it is "the love of money" that is the root of all evil.
Does Joyce Meyers put wealth ahead of God? Is wealth her God? This is what Jesus was warning against... not that one has wealth but does it keep one away from God. In Joyce Meyers case I haven't seen any evidence of same.
The way I see it, it isn't the accumulation of wealth that matters, but how one uses it. Money is not the root of all evil; it is "the love of money" that is the root of all evil.
Does Joyce Meyers put wealth ahead of God? Is wealth her God? This is what Jesus was warning against... not that one has wealth but does it keep one away from God. In Joyce Meyers case I haven't seen any evidence of same.
So then Oldies, tell us how Joyce Meyers uses her personal wealth. How much of her salary and compensation do you think she donates back to the ministry? Gives to the poor, etc ? I'm not talking about money before she is paid, but the money that comes directly to her.
Well, I have to apologize and retract my previous statement. I spoke before I investigated. I had NO idea this woman was so fabulously wealthy and self-indulgent.
I still think she does help people with her teachings. BUT it's very easy to do the right thing for the wrong reason.
I do seem to remember when they were building a worship center or outreach center or soemthing several years, she hammered home the concept that anyone who donated to the building find would receive a special blessing.
It's too bad. And you're right Belle, that is what people say about VPW. Only he was a pauper compared to this.
So then Oldies, tell us how Joyce Meyers uses her personal wealth. How much of her salary and compensation do you think she donates back to the ministry? Gives to the poor, etc ? I'm not talking about money before she is paid, but the money that comes directly to her.
What kind of evidence is needed Oldies?
Evidence that she puts her wealth ahead of God in her life? I haven't seen any. Just because she makes a lot of money doesn't necessarily mean she doesn't put God first and seek His kingdom first. What she does with the money, i.e., she should give to the congregents, she should give to the poor, etc. is her business on how she spends her money. If she declines to give her money to the congregants or poor, what does that mean? God knows. But it is her money, how she spends it is her business.
Having said that, I'm not opposed to the legal challenges made in favor of tax payments. As much as I dislike taxes, if it is proven legally that according to U.S. law her ministry should be paying taxes, then she should abide within the U.S. law. She's paying the taxes under protest but legally challenging it, which is her right.
Non-bulls**t translation of 'More negative' = more challenging of concepts that you have pledged absolute allegience too. ... Right? ;)
Not only to us 'secular jerks' <_< , but also to all those to whom the church/organization wants to actually convince that said church/organization is so on the up-and-up and honest and all, thereby showing the world that their god is morally superior to all others, ... and that's where all these supposed morally superior churches/organizations fail!
Re: Avoid paying taxes <-> Evade paying taxes.
Now THAT legal 'hair splitting' is so RICH. ..... And some people wonder why the legal profession is held in such ill regard!
Yes, there is a difference. You do it yourself on your private taxes, Garth. They are called credits!!!! So before you start flinging the muck, better duck baby!
The absolute allegiance you refer to is because I bowed to the King, Garth. It is the only way you rise to it. It doesn't come from any allegiance to any pastor (been kicked around too much in that arena) or any particular denomination. You probably don't remember it anymore, been too many years ago, but for a while we were writing privately to each other through snail mail. You once reproved me because I dared to think differently than what CES was teaching. So I will now dare to reprove you for having the audacity to leave the Glorious Throne Room of the King. If you say you were never in it... well then the door is always open.
So I double dog dare you to try again and perhaps you'll lose the bitter root that has formed in you. I know, I had to hack mine out as well.
So, I wuv you too babycakes! MMWAHHH!
Nahh. I figured you learned on your own, grasshopper.
BRIDE - "I carry my own water too. Oh, MY GOD...I have an undersink purifier...better get rid of that before I get criticized as well. So, she prefers a particular BRAND NAME....What is the BIG DEAL????
Might there be a difference between preferring Dom Perignon champagne as opposed to Cold Duck?
A whole lot of difference I would say. Maybe a .25 difference between Perrier and Dannon???
BRIDE - Again, if you can afford it, you would too. Joyce is supposed to go down to "RENT-A-BOX" and sleep in the ghetto?
Didn't Jesus hung out with the dregs of society? Dregs generally don't have rooms at the Jerusalem Hilton.
OH, PLEASE! No one here on this forum would do that, unless you are forced to, so why knock her about.
I recall passages in the Bible, of the Lord Jesus sitting down with high society as well. Probably slept there as well too. He had rich women following him, probably doing his laundry and cooking too. Now what!
Why? Because she happens to be a minister? Even Jesus had an accountant (not too honest), but The Lord still had one! Bet He rode the best mule, too? Want to knock HIM? Be my guest!
So, by this logic, Jesus would have stayed at the Jerusalem Hilton, worn a Rolex on his tv show, and driven a Lamborghini Testarossa?
How do you know if he isn't already? Do you think the Holy Father couldn't give it to Him?
Bless you anyways. I like your tongue in cheek.
Hey, that kinda looks like Rocky Balboa, doesn't it?
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. Wasn't much impressed with the "audience" TYVM, but then, your mileage obviously varies...
I heard her somewhere a few times years ago - when her ministry was still small and she was struggling.
I think one of the only reasons she became so popular is because the lady is a riot. At least back then she was.
She could easily be a top comedian - her stories were hilarious. Thus, she was deemed "human" and frail like everyone else and they could relate, especially women.
I also remember thinking, this lady will go to the top. It will be interesting to see what she morphs into when the $$$ comes rolling in. Will she become a ruthless VP close behind the scenes - nasty, things to hide?
I know nothing about her now, but this debate is interesting.
I remember questioning DM and other people - asking, why does VP need the bus, airplane, fancy clothes, etc. She said because they need it to move the Word, to look the "best" as God's representative. Oh, hmmm..... I guess we were to be happy with our clothes from give away and beat up cars. I never bought it. And, true to form, the "wealth" was shared with other top leadership in TWI who were public.
Sounds like history repeating itself here with Joyce. As far as I'm concerned, once the $$ rolls in the you see the fancy compounds, house, buses, entourage, etc. - you're on your way to corruption.
Not necessarily! Isn't that kinda up to the Lord to judge her? Even as He will judge all of us, whether rich or poor? It isn't the dollars that will help you slide by the Throne.
Goey: I think that Christian minitries should hold themselves to a higher standard than secular busninesses. It is not so much an issue of "is it illegal" than it is one of "does it please God". Christian ministries should not only obey the law, they should also strive to please God - (assuming that God is actually involved)
Goey: I think that churches should be fully transparant to ALL , especially if they are claiming that by tithing to them, it will be multiplied back to the giver. These ministries are recruiting "secular jerks" and thier cash so I think the "secular jerks" should know where the money goes. What good reason could they have for not being fully transparant? I think I know. On the other hand, detailed financial information is readily available on any publically traded corporation, so I don't get your point in that area.
Detailed? When my mutual funds send me their annual report, it comes as 5 color pie charts showing bland %'s, if it does have any further break down, it doesn't reveal if the CEO's bought suits with company money, how many bottles of champagne were written off as business expenses et al.
Goey: And I would add, please don't overly defend them either if you don't have an inside view. Since you don't know Meyer's salary or how much she has personally gained from the donations she solicits, you would certainly not have an inside view. Given the track record of TV ministries in the past, I would be reluctant to run to their defense without some really good info. I don't really think they deserve the benefit if the doubt. Been too many scams.
What I was defending, is a ministry that is being blatantly accused with YELLOW journalism. It would also behoove those who are villainizing her to have an inside view as well. The street runs two ways.
Goey: Unfortunatley, since so many TV ministers have been exposed over the years as frauds, thieves and money-mongers it is understandabe that folks like Meyers get "back slaps" when they are seen living a life of extreme wealth and privilege. Fancy houses, fancy cars, etc. We know where the money comes from. The question I have is how much do they actually deserve? If they are getting wealthy off of the tithes, then it seems to me it is a business for profit and not actually a "ministry" and there should be no tax exemptions. This would be especially true if the Board of Directors is made up only of family members and lackies that are yes people to the charismatic leader.
Ok, does Joyce personally own these cars? Maybe her home perhaps, or is it listed as a parsonage? Therefore, owned by the ministry...I can't remember. I looked at the articles last week.
I say, if you are gonna claim the church tax breaks, open the books for all to see, otherwise close them and then be honest that it really just a business and that a few insiders are getting very rich off of the tithes and donations.
Goey: I take strong exception to this. Why would it necessarily be spiritual jealousy? I think it is more of a case of folks wanting to be taught and to learn from someone that is not getting filty rich off of their donations - where the greater part of the donations (minus reasonable expenses) goes to real charitable causes - rather than to support a lavish lifestyle for someone who claims to be a minister for God. How is that spiritual jealousy?
Goey: If it is a for profit business, then modern merchanidizing techniques are fine. Just be open as say its a business and that you are getting rich off of the tithes and "love offerings". At least that is honest.
Maybe you are not aware of this. When I applied for my FEIN, the IRS asked me if I ever intended selling books, tapes etc. At such an early stage I naturally said "not at this time." I wouldn't be surprised to find out you have to actually re-incorporate under a business identity (albeit the same/similar name of ministry), after all, Uncle Sam wants his cut to be sure.
What today's so-called prophets and evangelists do is irrelevant to the issue. There is a big difference in a love offering to meet the basic needs of a minister, etc and a high tech marketing campaing that brings in hundreds of thousands of dollars which is used to keep a minister in a lavish lifestyle. Maybe you need to "get real" on this.
Again, who actually owns the things, or is Joyce only using them? If she were to ever leave and they replaced her (and I know...) she would not be able to take it with her. If a NFP fails for whatever reason, you must dispose of any materials, lands, vehicles to another NFP. It is not allowed to sell it, give it away privately etc. There are laws that govern such things.
Goey: It is not villainizing to expect those who claim to be Christian leaders to hold themsleves to certain standards. It is not villainizing to ask these leaders to give an open accounting of finances and how much they personally gain from tithes and offerings.
The TV ministers that have fallen, fell because of their own doings, not because they were "pulled down" unjustly. I don't think anyone here is trying to "pull down" Joyce Meyers. Seem more like folks just want some answers and some facts.
Goey: 400K seems quite high to me - even for Graham. I thought is was more like 200K. But regardless, what is it that leads these ministers think they should make so much money and live lifestyles far and above those they claim to serve?
FYI, as I understand it John Haggee is one of the higest paid TV ministers today. His 2003 compensation package was reported to be about 1.2 million. The Copeland's seems to be raking in quite a bit as well. Not sure what the 990's say.
[/color]
Another poster said all was available on her web site. Why don't you go there and check it out at the horse's mouth? As far as living lifestyles, they must answer to the Lord. But please remember, there's a high price to be paid when you are in the lime light not to mention the untold hours that no one else sees.
Oldies, I don't care who Jesus ate with, that's not the point.
I don't read about Jesus amassing a material kingdom here on earth. He didn't go around in his motorcoach, latest harley, buying up property, making a compound with lots of buildings, or building a castle, or whatever wealthy people did back then - amass sheep?
Jesus Christ preached a spiritual kingdom coming - that was his message - that all are welcome - follow Him.
He himself said it is very hard for a rich man to enter the coming kingdom.
I agree - what we see here is Americanized Christianity.
There is no difference between the amassing of wealth of these televangelists and the vatican amassing their wealth. None.
It is a marriage with the world, it is creating an earthy, material kingdom, it is a making merchandise of God's people. It is enriching themselves and gorging themselves on the backs of their flock.
It is disgusting.
Pray tell, how do you think that you will reach a larger audience? It costs to run tv shows, ads, host internet things. I know I'm being redundant, but do tell me how you are going to move the Word of God on a pauper's salary? When the Apostles were collecting funds in Jerusalem, do you really know that they didn't also put some to usury to make more money? Since the Bible is silent on these issues, it is only fair to not make unfair comparisons.
So let me ask you...so if I pay tuition at a college/seminary (which I did), and I buy their text books...are they making merchanise of the Christians who attend? Are they the only ones who profit? Could it not be possible that some profits remain intangible such as knowledge learned etc.?
So if people buy her books/tapes/CD's/videos, is it not possible that both are profiting, albeit in different formats?
When I look at the materialism of the church of today in America, I sometimes think we are in the 6th church of the book of revelations - the televangelists are leaders of the Laodicean church - the one right before the gathering, the one of which Christ says he will spit out of his mouth.
Rev. 3:17: You say, 'I am rich and well off; I have all I need.' But you do not know how miserable and pitiful you are! You are poor, naked, and blind.
As Peter once said, Silver and Gold have I none, but rise and walk.
Today, with the televangelists its perversely backwards.
Silver and gold have they, but no one is healed, there is no one rising and walking.
Defend these new megachurches and its leaders, say its a great thing all you want.
But they will be spit out - they look good, they look great, millions follow these people.
Its the great end times apostasy. The false, "feel good" health and wealth, name it and claim it church.
One that has nothing to do with Christ. The one that will be spit out.
So I will now dare to reprove you for having the audacity to leave the Glorious Throne Room of the King.
"Having the audacity to leave the Glorious Throne Room". :o Wow! ... The audacity of it all. ... To leave. ... (((gasps))) Such a crime!
Yer a riot lady.
I think I know who you are (but I won't give a guess here; gonna respect your privacy and all that), but when I wrote to you about CES, I seriously doubt that it was about you "dared to think differently than what CES was teaching", but (at the time) I thought you were wrong in what you said. Nowadays, I don't care what you believe, as I pretty much dropped all things 'religious', CES or no CES. (Oh by the way, if you are who I think you are, ... how's Dale Sides Ministry going, hmmm? ;) )
... perhaps you'll lose the bitter root that has formed in you.
Oh yeah, right! Like the ONLY reason one can walk away and no longer believe is that they have some 'root of bitterness'. ... Uhhm, ok. Whatever. ....... Me, I rather see it as daring to see and scrutinize and think for myself in making up my mind about such things, ... instead of mindlessly taking some 'Lord and King's' word for it without question, and that based on blind faith and blind obedience.
But if that is what floats your boat, knock yourself out. ... Just keep it outta my face, ok?
Goey: I think that Christian minitries should hold themselves to a higher standard than secular busninesses. It is not so much an issue of "is it illegal" than it is one of "does it please God". Christian ministries should not only obey the law, they should also strive to please God - (assuming that God is actually involved)
Goey: I think that churches should be fully transparant to ALL , especially if they are claiming that by tithing to them, it will be multiplied back to the giver. These ministries are recruiting "secular jerks" and thier cash so I think the "secular jerks" should know where the money goes. What good reason could they have for not being fully transparant? I think I know. On the other hand, detailed financial information is readily available on any publically traded corporation, so I don't get your point in that area.
Detailed? When my mutual funds send me their annual report, it comes as 5 color pie charts showing bland %'s, if it does have any further break down, it doesn't reveal if the CEO's bought suits with company money, how many bottles of champagne were written off as business expenses et al.
Goey Again: We are not talling about mutual funds are we? That is totally irrelevant to my point above and to what I was saying. (Strawman argument) I said "publicly traded corporation", didn't I? -- We can hardly compare a mutual fund made up of many different entities with a single corporation can we? Of course not. Apples and oranges. However, FYI - The Edgar Database is open to all who want to look at detailed finances of publically traded corporations.
Goey: And I would add, please don't overly defend them either if you don't have an inside view. Since you don't know Meyer's salary or how much she has personally gained from the donations she solicits, you would certainly not have an inside view. Given the track record of TV ministries in the past, I would be reluctant to run to their defense without some really good info. I don't really think they deserve the benefit if the doubt. Been too many scams.
BC: What I was defending, is a ministry that is being blatantly accused with YELLOW journalism. It would also behoove those who are villainizing her to have an inside view as well. The street runs two ways.
Goey Again: The "inside view" comes from financial statements and minutes of boards meetings that became public records when Joyce Meyer sued to maintain Church status. Her lavish lifestyle is public record. And once again, pointing out Joyce Meyers' lavish lifestyle and huge salary is not "villanizing". I don't see it as "yellow journalism" at all. Just getting the facts out in the open. Facts that you seem to think should be either suppressed or go unquestioned.
What is blatent to me is Ms Meyers' huge personal gain from a not for profit corproration, which BTW is illegal.
BTW you said you had a NFP corporation, is that right? It wouldn't happen to be Christian Ministry of any kind would it? Just asking.
Look, I don't want her to stop her "ministry" er , business or have it shut down. Quite a few people seem to like her stuff and she seems to do some people some good. ( it's not my cup of tea) .
However, no way is this truly a not-for-profit charity, considering how much Meyer and her family have personally gained. It's a very profitable business masquerading as a church. Therefore it should be taxed like the profitable business that it is.
Goey: Unfortunatley, since so many TV ministers have been exposed over the years as frauds, thieves and money-mongers it is understandabe that folks like Meyers get "back slaps" when they are seen living a life of extreme wealth and privilege. Fancy houses, fancy cars, etc. We know where the money comes from. The question I have is how much do they actually deserve? If they are getting wealthy off of the tithes, then it seems to me it is a business for profit and not actually a "ministry" and there should be no tax exemptions. This would be especially true if the Board of Directors is made up only of family members and lackies that are yes people to the charismatic leader.
BC: Ok, does Joyce personally own these cars? Maybe her home perhaps, or is it listed as a parsonage? Therefore, owned by the ministry...I can't remember. I looked at the articles last week.
Goey Again: Whether or not she personally "owns" the cars or property is irrelevant. She is getting free use of them which is bascially the same thing when you consider that she presides over the Board of Directors and controls the whole corporation. It's income plain and simple. She has no car note, no insurance and no maintanence expenses. No housing exenses - no mortage. This is actually better than owning a car or a home. She runs the place carte blanche and uses the not for profit "corporation" as a holding company for property that her and her familly have exclusive use of.
Goey: I say, if you are gonna claim the church tax breaks, open the books for all to see, otherwise close them and then be honest that it really just a business and that a few insiders are getting very rich off of the tithes and donations.
Goey: I take strong exception to this. Why would it necessarily be spiritual jealousy? I think it is more of a case of folks wanting to be taught and to learn from someone that is not getting filty rich off of their donations - where the greater part of the donations (minus reasonable expenses) goes to real charitable causes - rather than to support a lavish lifestyle for someone who claims to be a minister for God. How is that spiritual jealousy?
Goey: If it is a for profit business, then modern merchanidizing techniques are fine. Just be open as say its a business and that you are getting rich off of the tithes and "love offerings". At least that is honest.
BC: Maybe you are not aware of this. When I applied for my FEIN, the IRS asked me if I ever intended selling books, tapes etc. At such an early stage I naturally said "not at this time." I wouldn't be surprised to find out you have to actually re-incorporate under a business identity (albeit the same/similar name of ministry), after all, Uncle Sam wants his cut to be sure.
Goey Again: Looks like the IRS has gotten wise to the tape and books scams from some so called non-profits. The tapes are produced and marketed with money from donations and then the leader gets to personally keep all the royalties, then claiming that this royalty income has nothing to do with funds from the ministry.
But ummmm .... what does that have to do with what I posted above? Can you address my points please?
Why don't you expound upon your comment/accusation about "spirit of jealousy?"
-------------------------------------------------
Goey: What today's so-called prophets and evangelists do is irrelevant to the issue. There is a big difference in a love offering to meet the basic needs of a minister, etc and a high tech marketing campaing that brings in hundreds of thousands of dollars which is used to keep a minister in a lavish lifestyle. Maybe you need to "get real" on this.
BC: Again, who actually owns the things, or is Joyce only using them? If she were to ever leave and they replaced her (and I know...) she would not be able to take it with her. If a NFP fails for whatever reason, you must dispose of any materials, lands, vehicles to another NFP. It is not allowed to sell it, give it away privately etc. There are laws that govern such things.
Goey Again: Let's not be naive. Ownership is irrelevant. She has no personall expenses at all. Everything is paid for. Just like it was for VPW and LCM down to the personal servants. Therefore, her salary and book royalties can go straight to savings and personal investments. . She has no personal debt at all and multiple millions in personal savings and investments. So she will never really need to take anything with her if the NFPC fails
And let's not be naive about that either. If the main NFP "fails" it can be liquidated to another NFP controlled by the same folks. Kinda like a reorgainzation. -- Like TWI Inc. and Gunnison Inc. Two completely separate NFPC's controlled by the same folks. IF TWI ever dissolves, its assets can be given to Gunnison Inc. or vice versa. In either case the same folks will control and can have exclusive use of the booty.
Janice! :) Long time girl! How are things shakin'? ... As you can see, I've gone a sizeable change in my views since last we corresponded, ohhh, about 11 years ago. Hope that doesn't bring too much disappointment. ... Ahh well.
I have not read this thread yet but i will reply my thought and iy is a lesson i learned in twi.
you can break it all down and say what is a right amount or fair and never agree who "deserves " what with Jesus no ne deserves anything.. He freely gives life to us.
end rant.
as far as these ministries getting money for me the issue is this.
they put god in the mix I bought alot of crap from twi because i thought God was in the doing of it all.. a crazy spin really.
to use God as a dvantage point to make alot of money is unfair I think because people are desperate for answers miricles and saving grace.
and there stands Jesus christ raised from the dead saying "well excuse me it was not exactly free as I did die for you all".
but folks want entertainment.. i see nothing wrong with buying a dvd or going to a movie and paying for the work it took to get this funny or drama show to you for entertainment you enjoy.
they say what it is and they have a right to live well for it because they are in the business of entertaining you .
the selling of Christ and His grace reaches farther into accountability I truly believe that, and to use God and His Love to live in a manner that those who are searching for answers will never know is more than unfair.
does she sell christ or does she sell entertainment?
The fact that donations are openly solicited on the home page is quite interesting and may be somewhat telling.
It appears she is after a piece of the same pie that Meyers is feasting upon.
I wonder if the books are open. I bet not.
The About "US" page only lists one person. Jan*** Rob******, yet it appears to be a one horse(mare?)show.
She names herself as a Reverend. It would be interesting to know where and by whom she was ordained.
The mission seems to be a noble cause, but then again, so does Joyce Meyer's.
This post (and Belle's) has been reported as a personal attack on another member of GS. It commits the following fallacy.
Fallacy: Ad Hominem
Description of Ad Hominem
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of the person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
Example of Ad Hominem
1. Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."
P.S. At least when I make a report of a post I find objectionable I won't hide behind anonymity. I'll let the person I'm making a report about know that I reported their post. You (the one being reported) have the right to defend/explain why you think I'm wrong. You could do it through a PM and if your reasons are good I'll extend a public apology for reporting your post.
Mssr. Moore,
Please point out
You'll have to wait until my response is viewed and released.
"Having the audacity to leave the Glorious Throne Room". :o Wow! ... The audacity of it all. ... To leave. ... (((gasps))) Such a crime!
Yer a riot lady.
I think I know who you are (but I won't give a guess here; gonna respect your privacy and all that), but when I wrote to you about CES, I seriously doubt that it was about you "dared to think differently than what CES was teaching", but (at the time) I thought you were wrong in what you said. Nowadays, I don't care what you believe, as I pretty much dropped all things 'religious', CES or no CES. (Oh by the way, if you are who I think you are, ... how's Dale Sides Ministry going, hmmm? ;) )
Oh yeah, right! Like the ONLY reason one can walk away and no longer believe is that they have some 'root of bitterness'. ... Uhhm, ok. Whatever. ....... Me, I rather see it as daring to see and scrutinize and think for myself in making up my mind about such things, ... instead of mindlessly taking some 'Lord and King's' word for it without question, and that based on blind faith and blind obedience.
But if that is what floats your boat, knock yourself out. ... Just keep it outta my face, ok?
Nah! You did! You were 100% pro CES and I was already questioning because I had seen some dangerous trends forming in the leadership that looked too much like TWI. You soundly reproved me and gave me the reasons why I needed to drop my heretical beliefs, i.e. non-CES... LOL. Kinda looks like to me the tables turned on you. What a hoot! Oh, well, you should really reconsider re-entering the Lord's Temple, Garth. The Lord Jesus, THE REAL ONE, is a whole lot different than any church, denomination, pastor, evangelist or whatever...
I wouldn't leave now for anything.
As far as you saying "taking some Lord and King's word for it without question..." Yes Garth, you can take HIS WORD for it,
you confuse the two because of taking a MAN'S word for it, i.e. church, cult etc. A big difference.
Anyway, that's why I stopped writing, I was already out the door and you weren't!
Please point out to the less astute of us just where it is that anyone (other than possibly Ms. Meyers) has been attacked (oh, and please keep up the self-righteous tone as much as possible, it's so appealing).
I see where someone's obvious bias has been pointed out, nothing more...
Please point out to the less astute of us just where it is that anyone (other than possibly Ms. Meyers) has been attacked (oh, and please keep up the self-righteous tone as much as possible, it's so appealing).
I see where someone's obvious bias has been pointed out, nothing more...
I already did point out. The fact that you can't see it is not my problem.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
18
17
20
26
Popular Days
Nov 10
26
Nov 7
18
Nov 13
15
Nov 12
14
Top Posters In This Topic
Goey 18 posts
sky4it 17 posts
Larry N Moore 20 posts
brideofjc 26 posts
Popular Days
Nov 10 2007
26 posts
Nov 7 2007
18 posts
Nov 13 2007
15 posts
Nov 12 2007
14 posts
socks
Personal opinion-wise, I like Joyce Meyers, to an extent. She's kinda like the little engine that said "I can, I can".
I consider anyone who is financially successful in preaching suspect. I don't consider Joyce Meyers a "preacher" though, or a true "spiritual leader" in Christianity. She's a seemingly decent person who's running a successful business.
I'm not discounting wealth an outcome of preaching, but I don't really see that those who taught, spoke for God or said they did, or "preached" in the bible, were ever wealthy to the tune that "preachers" often hum today. They clearly needed better financial advice. (the quoted record about Jesus, implying he drank and ate in ways that were inappropriate is a gross misrepresentation of what that verse means, but that doesn't stop people from using it to make excuses for all manner of bad behavior).
David was wealthy but he wasn't a preacher, he was a King. Before that he was a shepherd of his father's flocks. I can see the religious people, like prophets, of the O.T. doing alright by themselves in different ways but hardly to the extent that the successful Televangelist of today lives.
It's unseemly and uncharacteristic of someone who considers themselves a Christian leader to amass huge amounts of personal wealth when the world is full of the poor and dying. A simple case can be made that it's immoral for one person to always have more than they need when others have nothing.
That might sound very "60's", very idealistic and vaguely evil. Can't a person work and have what they want?
Of course. It works out if I compare a Christian Leader who becomes wealthy off their religious service to say, a CEO who's primary purpose in work is to turn a profit for their company, investors, shareholders, etc.
That's the crux of it - the CEO, CFO or COO can honestly say, "I'm running a business here and the purpose is to make money, as much as I can for this company. I'll do it honestly and as humanely as possible but the goal here is to make lots of money." Their service is to the profit.
A Christian Leader who takes the stage under the cover of the Name of God isn't giving their service for the money, they're doing it for God, and to further His purposes and profit.
I guess some Christian Leaders will say, well, part of God's purpose is to make me wealthy, what's wrong with that?
My impression is it speaks to the character of the person and the depth of their relationship with their work if they keep it.
I'm all for people doing well, having what they need and enjoying life. But when religion and business mix, it's a bust. Making money for personal gain off the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ is wrong, because it's not our money when it comes in, it's "Gods" money, earned by the service of Jesus Christ. Writing books and walking around on a stage talking about what someone else did - what's that really worth?
But yes, I do appreciate some of what I've heard from Joyce Meyers, she says some good things and seems to want to help others have a good life.
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
irisheyes
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
The way I see it, it isn't the accumulation of wealth that matters, but how one uses it. Money is not the root of all evil; it is "the love of money" that is the root of all evil.
Does Joyce Meyers put wealth ahead of God? Is wealth her God? This is what Jesus was warning against... not that one has wealth but does it keep one away from God. In Joyce Meyers case I haven't seen any evidence of same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
So then Oldies, tell us how Joyce Meyers uses her personal wealth. How much of her salary and compensation do you think she donates back to the ministry? Gives to the poor, etc ? I'm not talking about money before she is paid, but the money that comes directly to her.
What kind of evidence is needed Oldies?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
I...see.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Well, I have to apologize and retract my previous statement. I spoke before I investigated. I had NO idea this woman was so fabulously wealthy and self-indulgent.
I still think she does help people with her teachings. BUT it's very easy to do the right thing for the wrong reason.
I do seem to remember when they were building a worship center or outreach center or soemthing several years, she hammered home the concept that anyone who donated to the building find would receive a special blessing.
It's too bad. And you're right Belle, that is what people say about VPW. Only he was a pauper compared to this.
Darn! And I think she should know better.
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Evidence that she puts her wealth ahead of God in her life? I haven't seen any. Just because she makes a lot of money doesn't necessarily mean she doesn't put God first and seek His kingdom first. What she does with the money, i.e., she should give to the congregents, she should give to the poor, etc. is her business on how she spends her money. If she declines to give her money to the congregants or poor, what does that mean? God knows. But it is her money, how she spends it is her business.
Having said that, I'm not opposed to the legal challenges made in favor of tax payments. As much as I dislike taxes, if it is proven legally that according to U.S. law her ministry should be paying taxes, then she should abide within the U.S. law. She's paying the taxes under protest but legally challenging it, which is her right.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
Yes, there is a difference. You do it yourself on your private taxes, Garth. They are called credits!!!! So before you start flinging the muck, better duck baby!
The absolute allegiance you refer to is because I bowed to the King, Garth. It is the only way you rise to it. It doesn't come from any allegiance to any pastor (been kicked around too much in that arena) or any particular denomination. You probably don't remember it anymore, been too many years ago, but for a while we were writing privately to each other through snail mail. You once reproved me because I dared to think differently than what CES was teaching. So I will now dare to reprove you for having the audacity to leave the Glorious Throne Room of the King. If you say you were never in it... well then the door is always open.
So I double dog dare you to try again and perhaps you'll lose the bitter root that has formed in you. I know, I had to hack mine out as well.
So, I wuv you too babycakes! MMWAHHH!
No, I only have boy toys!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
BRIDE - "I carry my own water too. Oh, MY GOD...I have an undersink purifier...better get rid of that before I get criticized as well. So, she prefers a particular BRAND NAME....What is the BIG DEAL????
Might there be a difference between preferring Dom Perignon champagne as opposed to Cold Duck?
A whole lot of difference I would say. Maybe a .25 difference between Perrier and Dannon???
BRIDE - Again, if you can afford it, you would too. Joyce is supposed to go down to "RENT-A-BOX" and sleep in the ghetto?
Didn't Jesus hung out with the dregs of society? Dregs generally don't have rooms at the Jerusalem Hilton.
OH, PLEASE! No one here on this forum would do that, unless you are forced to, so why knock her about.
I recall passages in the Bible, of the Lord Jesus sitting down with high society as well. Probably slept there as well too. He had rich women following him, probably doing his laundry and cooking too. Now what!
Why? Because she happens to be a minister? Even Jesus had an accountant (not too honest), but The Lord still had one! Bet He rode the best mule, too? Want to knock HIM? Be my guest!
So, by this logic, Jesus would have stayed at the Jerusalem Hilton, worn a Rolex on his tv show, and driven a Lamborghini Testarossa?
How do you know if he isn't already? Do you think the Holy Father couldn't give it to Him?
Bless you anyways. I like your tongue in cheek.
Hey, that kinda looks like Rocky Balboa, doesn't it?
You are supposed to be worshipping the audience of ONE! If you were looking at the congregation, may I suggest that you turn around?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
quote name='Sunesis' date='Nov 7 2007, 11:45 AM' post='380299']
I heard her somewhere a few times years ago - when her ministry was still small and she was struggling.
I think one of the only reasons she became so popular is because the lady is a riot. At least back then she was.
She could easily be a top comedian - her stories were hilarious. Thus, she was deemed "human" and frail like everyone else and they could relate, especially women.
I also remember thinking, this lady will go to the top. It will be interesting to see what she morphs into when the $$$ comes rolling in. Will she become a ruthless VP close behind the scenes - nasty, things to hide?
I know nothing about her now, but this debate is interesting.
I remember questioning DM and other people - asking, why does VP need the bus, airplane, fancy clothes, etc. She said because they need it to move the Word, to look the "best" as God's representative. Oh, hmmm..... I guess we were to be happy with our clothes from give away and beat up cars. I never bought it. And, true to form, the "wealth" was shared with other top leadership in TWI who were public.
Sounds like history repeating itself here with Joyce. As far as I'm concerned, once the $$ rolls in the you see the fancy compounds, house, buses, entourage, etc. - you're on your way to corruption.
Not necessarily! Isn't that kinda up to the Lord to judge her? Even as He will judge all of us, whether rich or poor? It isn't the dollars that will help you slide by the Throne.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
Another poster said all was available on her web site. Why don't you go there and check it out at the horse's mouth? As far as living lifestyles, they must answer to the Lord. But please remember, there's a high price to be paid when you are in the lime light not to mention the untold hours that no one else sees.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
Pray tell, how do you think that you will reach a larger audience? It costs to run tv shows, ads, host internet things. I know I'm being redundant, but do tell me how you are going to move the Word of God on a pauper's salary? When the Apostles were collecting funds in Jerusalem, do you really know that they didn't also put some to usury to make more money? Since the Bible is silent on these issues, it is only fair to not make unfair comparisons.
So let me ask you...so if I pay tuition at a college/seminary (which I did), and I buy their text books...are they making merchanise of the Christians who attend? Are they the only ones who profit? Could it not be possible that some profits remain intangible such as knowledge learned etc.?
So if people buy her books/tapes/CD's/videos, is it not possible that both are profiting, albeit in different formats?
God Bless
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
When I look at the materialism of the church of today in America, I sometimes think we are in the 6th church of the book of revelations - the televangelists are leaders of the Laodicean church - the one right before the gathering, the one of which Christ says he will spit out of his mouth.
Rev. 3:17: You say, 'I am rich and well off; I have all I need.' But you do not know how miserable and pitiful you are! You are poor, naked, and blind.
As Peter once said, Silver and Gold have I none, but rise and walk.
Today, with the televangelists its perversely backwards.
Silver and gold have they, but no one is healed, there is no one rising and walking.
Defend these new megachurches and its leaders, say its a great thing all you want.
But they will be spit out - they look good, they look great, millions follow these people.
Its the great end times apostasy. The false, "feel good" health and wealth, name it and claim it church.
One that has nothing to do with Christ. The one that will be spit out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
BrideofJC,
"Having the audacity to leave the Glorious Throne Room". :o Wow! ... The audacity of it all. ... To leave. ... (((gasps))) Such a crime!I think I know who you are (but I won't give a guess here; gonna respect your privacy and all that), but when I wrote to you about CES, I seriously doubt that it was about you "dared to think differently than what CES was teaching", but (at the time) I thought you were wrong in what you said. Nowadays, I don't care what you believe, as I pretty much dropped all things 'religious', CES or no CES. (Oh by the way, if you are who I think you are, ... how's Dale Sides Ministry going, hmmm? ;) )
Oh yeah, right! Like the ONLY reason one can walk away and no longer believe is that they have some 'root of bitterness'. ... Uhhm, ok. Whatever. ....... Me, I rather see it as daring to see and scrutinize and think for myself in making up my mind about such things, ... instead of mindlessly taking some 'Lord and King's' word for it without question, and that based on blind faith and blind obedience.
But if that is what floats your boat, knock yourself out. ... Just keep it outta my face, ok?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Goey: I think that Christian minitries should hold themselves to a higher standard than secular busninesses. It is not so much an issue of "is it illegal" than it is one of "does it please God". Christian ministries should not only obey the law, they should also strive to please God - (assuming that God is actually involved)
Goey: I think that churches should be fully transparant to ALL , especially if they are claiming that by tithing to them, it will be multiplied back to the giver. These ministries are recruiting "secular jerks" and thier cash so I think the "secular jerks" should know where the money goes. What good reason could they have for not being fully transparant? I think I know. On the other hand, detailed financial information is readily available on any publically traded corporation, so I don't get your point in that area.
Detailed? When my mutual funds send me their annual report, it comes as 5 color pie charts showing bland %'s, if it does have any further break down, it doesn't reveal if the CEO's bought suits with company money, how many bottles of champagne were written off as business expenses et al.
Goey Again: We are not talling about mutual funds are we? That is totally irrelevant to my point above and to what I was saying. (Strawman argument) I said "publicly traded corporation", didn't I? -- We can hardly compare a mutual fund made up of many different entities with a single corporation can we? Of course not. Apples and oranges. However, FYI - The Edgar Database is open to all who want to look at detailed finances of publically traded corporations.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Goey: And I would add, please don't overly defend them either if you don't have an inside view. Since you don't know Meyer's salary or how much she has personally gained from the donations she solicits, you would certainly not have an inside view. Given the track record of TV ministries in the past, I would be reluctant to run to their defense without some really good info. I don't really think they deserve the benefit if the doubt. Been too many scams.
BC: What I was defending, is a ministry that is being blatantly accused with YELLOW journalism. It would also behoove those who are villainizing her to have an inside view as well. The street runs two ways.
Goey Again: The "inside view" comes from financial statements and minutes of boards meetings that became public records when Joyce Meyer sued to maintain Church status. Her lavish lifestyle is public record. And once again, pointing out Joyce Meyers' lavish lifestyle and huge salary is not "villanizing". I don't see it as "yellow journalism" at all. Just getting the facts out in the open. Facts that you seem to think should be either suppressed or go unquestioned.
What is blatent to me is Ms Meyers' huge personal gain from a not for profit corproration, which BTW is illegal.
BTW you said you had a NFP corporation, is that right? It wouldn't happen to be Christian Ministry of any kind would it? Just asking.
Look, I don't want her to stop her "ministry" er , business or have it shut down. Quite a few people seem to like her stuff and she seems to do some people some good. ( it's not my cup of tea) .
However, no way is this truly a not-for-profit charity, considering how much Meyer and her family have personally gained. It's a very profitable business masquerading as a church. Therefore it should be taxed like the profitable business that it is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Goey: Unfortunatley, since so many TV ministers have been exposed over the years as frauds, thieves and money-mongers it is understandabe that folks like Meyers get "back slaps" when they are seen living a life of extreme wealth and privilege. Fancy houses, fancy cars, etc. We know where the money comes from. The question I have is how much do they actually deserve? If they are getting wealthy off of the tithes, then it seems to me it is a business for profit and not actually a "ministry" and there should be no tax exemptions. This would be especially true if the Board of Directors is made up only of family members and lackies that are yes people to the charismatic leader.
BC: Ok, does Joyce personally own these cars? Maybe her home perhaps, or is it listed as a parsonage? Therefore, owned by the ministry...I can't remember. I looked at the articles last week.
Goey Again: Whether or not she personally "owns" the cars or property is irrelevant. She is getting free use of them which is bascially the same thing when you consider that she presides over the Board of Directors and controls the whole corporation. It's income plain and simple. She has no car note, no insurance and no maintanence expenses. No housing exenses - no mortage. This is actually better than owning a car or a home. She runs the place carte blanche and uses the not for profit "corporation" as a holding company for property that her and her familly have exclusive use of.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goey: I say, if you are gonna claim the church tax breaks, open the books for all to see, otherwise close them and then be honest that it really just a business and that a few insiders are getting very rich off of the tithes and donations.
Goey: I take strong exception to this. Why would it necessarily be spiritual jealousy? I think it is more of a case of folks wanting to be taught and to learn from someone that is not getting filty rich off of their donations - where the greater part of the donations (minus reasonable expenses) goes to real charitable causes - rather than to support a lavish lifestyle for someone who claims to be a minister for God. How is that spiritual jealousy?
Goey: If it is a for profit business, then modern merchanidizing techniques are fine. Just be open as say its a business and that you are getting rich off of the tithes and "love offerings". At least that is honest.
BC: Maybe you are not aware of this. When I applied for my FEIN, the IRS asked me if I ever intended selling books, tapes etc. At such an early stage I naturally said "not at this time." I wouldn't be surprised to find out you have to actually re-incorporate under a business identity (albeit the same/similar name of ministry), after all, Uncle Sam wants his cut to be sure.
Goey Again: Looks like the IRS has gotten wise to the tape and books scams from some so called non-profits. The tapes are produced and marketed with money from donations and then the leader gets to personally keep all the royalties, then claiming that this royalty income has nothing to do with funds from the ministry.
But ummmm .... what does that have to do with what I posted above? Can you address my points please?
Why don't you expound upon your comment/accusation about "spirit of jealousy?"
-------------------------------------------------
Goey: What today's so-called prophets and evangelists do is irrelevant to the issue. There is a big difference in a love offering to meet the basic needs of a minister, etc and a high tech marketing campaing that brings in hundreds of thousands of dollars which is used to keep a minister in a lavish lifestyle. Maybe you need to "get real" on this.
BC: Again, who actually owns the things, or is Joyce only using them? If she were to ever leave and they replaced her (and I know...) she would not be able to take it with her. If a NFP fails for whatever reason, you must dispose of any materials, lands, vehicles to another NFP. It is not allowed to sell it, give it away privately etc. There are laws that govern such things.
Goey Again: Let's not be naive. Ownership is irrelevant. She has no personall expenses at all. Everything is paid for. Just like it was for VPW and LCM down to the personal servants. Therefore, her salary and book royalties can go straight to savings and personal investments. . She has no personal debt at all and multiple millions in personal savings and investments. So she will never really need to take anything with her if the NFPC fails
And let's not be naive about that either. If the main NFP "fails" it can be liquidated to another NFP controlled by the same folks. Kinda like a reorgainzation. -- Like TWI Inc. and Gunnison Inc. Two completely separate NFPC's controlled by the same folks. IF TWI ever dissolves, its assets can be given to Gunnison Inc. or vice versa. In either case the same folks will control and can have exclusive use of the booty.
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Yah, the bride's business is ministry - http://newcovenantchristianministries.org/ according to her profile.
I wonder if she is the author of The Common, the Holy and the Despised.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Yup! That's her all right.
Janice! :) Long time girl! How are things shakin'? ... As you can see, I've gone a sizeable change in my views since last we corresponded, ohhh, about 11 years ago. Hope that doesn't bring too much disappointment. ... Ahh well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Thanks Belle,
That certainly explains her rather obvious bias.
The fact that donations are openly solicited on the home page is quite interesting and may be somewhat telling.
It appears she is after a piece of the same pie that Meyers is feasting upon.
I wonder if the books are open. I bet not.
The About "US" page only lists one person. Jan*** Rob******, yet it appears to be a one horse(mare?)show.
She names herself as a Reverend. It would be interesting to know where and by whom she was ordained.
The mission seems to be a noble cause, but then again, so does Joyce Meyer's.
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Funny how this reverend and doctor crap is exactly what Jesus said not to do.
Exercising lordship over people and the interpretations of scriptures.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pond
I have not read this thread yet but i will reply my thought and iy is a lesson i learned in twi.
you can break it all down and say what is a right amount or fair and never agree who "deserves " what with Jesus no ne deserves anything.. He freely gives life to us.
end rant.
as far as these ministries getting money for me the issue is this.
they put god in the mix I bought alot of crap from twi because i thought God was in the doing of it all.. a crazy spin really.
to use God as a dvantage point to make alot of money is unfair I think because people are desperate for answers miricles and saving grace.
and there stands Jesus christ raised from the dead saying "well excuse me it was not exactly free as I did die for you all".
but folks want entertainment.. i see nothing wrong with buying a dvd or going to a movie and paying for the work it took to get this funny or drama show to you for entertainment you enjoy.
they say what it is and they have a right to live well for it because they are in the business of entertaining you .
the selling of Christ and His grace reaches farther into accountability I truly believe that, and to use God and His Love to live in a manner that those who are searching for answers will never know is more than unfair.
does she sell christ or does she sell entertainment?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
This post (and Belle's) has been reported as a personal attack on another member of GS. It commits the following fallacy.
Fallacy: Ad Hominem
Description of Ad Hominem
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of the person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
Example of Ad Hominem
1. Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."
P.S. At least when I make a report of a post I find objectionable I won't hide behind anonymity. I'll let the person I'm making a report about know that I reported their post. You (the one being reported) have the right to defend/explain why you think I'm wrong. You could do it through a PM and if your reasons are good I'll extend a public apology for reporting your post.
You'll have to wait until my response is viewed and released.
Edited by Larry N MooreLink to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
Nah! You did! You were 100% pro CES and I was already questioning because I had seen some dangerous trends forming in the leadership that looked too much like TWI. You soundly reproved me and gave me the reasons why I needed to drop my heretical beliefs, i.e. non-CES... LOL. Kinda looks like to me the tables turned on you. What a hoot! Oh, well, you should really reconsider re-entering the Lord's Temple, Garth. The Lord Jesus, THE REAL ONE, is a whole lot different than any church, denomination, pastor, evangelist or whatever...
I wouldn't leave now for anything.
As far as you saying "taking some Lord and King's word for it without question..." Yes Garth, you can take HIS WORD for it,
you confuse the two because of taking a MAN'S word for it, i.e. church, cult etc. A big difference.
Anyway, that's why I stopped writing, I was already out the door and you weren't!
God Bless you anyway!
Hope you find your way some day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
Mssr. Moore,
Please point out to the less astute of us just where it is that anyone (other than possibly Ms. Meyers) has been attacked (oh, and please keep up the self-righteous tone as much as possible, it's so appealing).
I see where someone's obvious bias has been pointed out, nothing more...
Edited by George AarLink to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
I already did point out. The fact that you can't see it is not my problem.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.