Farewell Francis

I scanned new articles linked here this morning before checking any other news stories and when I saw ‘Farewell Francis’ I jumped to the conclusion that the Pope had died. He is 82.

I wondered myself why we would, as fundamentalists, be so worried about the Pope. :^)

Regarding Chan, Here’s a link to the objectionable conference, for what it’s worth. The status at this point appears to be some rather odd associations.

According to the article he not just associated with but also endorsed false teachers.

Seeing Chan endorse someone said to be a prosperity theologian is odd, as he’s kinda made a career out of opposing the same. He just put out a video last week noting this.

Part of me wants to take him aside, tell him how I appreciate a lot of how he re-emphasizes the Gospels (versus many churches’ over-emphasis on the Pauline epistles), and plead with him to take a week off, clear his head, and get back to serving the church.

Which may be a big part of his problem; a few years back, he walked away from the church he started, thinking it was too much about him and not enough about Jesus. Might have been a great move, but maybe, just maybe, Paul consistently described theologians as being in contact with the church for a reason.

Who cares what Chan does? Crazy, I know. Maybe I should separate from Chan, even though he doesn’t know I exist? Maybe I should warn the congregation he’s now on the “forbidden list?” Or, maybe I should just prepare next week’s sermon and forget about him.

Too Hip, too cool

[TylerR]

Who cares what Chan does? Crazy, I know. Maybe I should separate from Chan, even though he doesn’t know I exist? Maybe I should warn the congregation he’s now on the “forbidden list?” Or, maybe I should just prepare next week’s sermon and forget about him.

Tyler,

It seems to me that Chan could be one of those whose earlier materials are called into question by his current actions. You mentioned elsewhere that you give away a book each month. If you had book by Chan to give away, would you maybe reconsider if he’s partnering with Benny Hinn, et al.?

I’d never give away a Chan book. Never got a good vibe from him.

[TylerR]

I’d never give away a Chan book. Never got a good vibe from him.

Play along for a minute. If you were going t give away a book by Chan, would his attendance at this conference and interaction with the likes of Benny Hinn and Todd White cause you reconsider? Or is his seeming cooperation with charismaniacs really irrelevant in your mind?

I don’t know Chan, don’t know his heart, haven’t seen anyone pointing out heretical writings or heretical teachings from him. It’s not wise to write a public article advising Christians to say “farewell” to a guy you don’t know, have never spoken to, and who has produced no heretical writings or teachings.

For example, James White recently posted a foolish, irresponsible tweet in which he said SEBTS has capitulated to the social justice movement. Does he really know that? His followers piled on like mad dogs. And so it goes.

I’ve had enough heresy hunting with the fundy wars. Accusations must be based on primary sources, and I won’t pile on unless I can verify them for myself. I’m concerned about Andy Stanley, but I haven’t actually listened to his “unhitch” sermons. I’ll warn people away from him at church in private conversation and be sure to not recommend him or his materials, but I certainly won’t write an article about it. Likewise with social justice; I need to read something from an allegedly responsible proponent before I make public statements about the movement.

Discernment ministries are a sewer and, generally speaking, so are the articles that traffic in its currency. In sum, consider this … https://bit.ly/2T81tUk

[pvawter]

TylerR wrote:

I’d never give away a Chan book. Never got a good vibe from him.

Play along for a minute. If you were going t give away a book by Chan, would his attendance at this conference and interaction with the likes of Benny Hinn and Todd White cause you reconsider? Or is his seeming cooperation with charismaniacs really irrelevant in your mind?

Not to derail the thread but the issue isn’t that they’re Charismatic. They are prosperity teachers. Huge difference there; or at least there can be.

I’ve had many profitable times with charismatics, though I disagree with their strong continuationism that seems to lend itself to false prophecy and fake tongues. There is a difference between honest disagreement where I can say “this is why they believe this, this is why I disagree”, and a place where the arguments are fundamentally dishonest. Mainstream charismatic theology is on the first side; prosperity theology is in the latter, IMO.

So my position on Chan is that I think he needs to make clear what his position is vis-a-vis prosperity theology, and then explain why, if this is indeed true, he would share a podium with those who appear to endorse it. There may be a workaround, there may not be. Again, I appreciate Chan’s emphasis on the Gospels, but if it comes down to neglecting other important parts of theology…well, I still appreciate the emphasis on the Gospels, but not at the cost of the epistles and such.

Not to derail the thread but the issue isn’t that they’re Charismatic. They are prosperity teachers. Huge difference there; or at least there can be.

Josh,

I won’t derail the thread on this, but I wrote what I did intentionally. It’s fine if Tyler doesn’t want to make a big deal about this. There’s still room for him under the big fundamentalist tent.