Banners & Shock and Awe Evangelism

Hi Jesse,

I printed out the post as it is quite long and I want to look into it.

I am concerned with some groups using signs that have much more radical statements than those you proposed. Not the least of which, "GOD HATES YOU!" Other statements I would not be comfortable using. I am concerned that the tone is quite overbearing and hurtful to the objectives of the Kingdom of God. I would call it, "mash your mouth" evangslism. Are you familiar with these groups?

The Salvation Army back in the days of William Booth used to rent out the movie house and put up a big banner that said [b]SAVE YOUR SOULS![/b]

Hi Jesse,

Having used banners myself in street outreach, I am not against them. I have fielded objections to this also when we used huge 'REPENT' banners. The concern I have is for these radical groups that seem to be almost militant in their signage. Personally, I think the radical groups have so muddied the waters that to use a sign right now almost immediately conjurs up images of the Topeka group or others. It is almost counter productive from the beginning if you are associated with [i]them[/i].

You used a lot of examples of Jesus' radical teachings but it may be useful to add some of the most radical things He ever taught, such as His perogative to forgive sins and His setting loose demonized peoples. "COME OUT" is a pretty radical statement. He made that to some devils. "Take up thy bed and walk" is another. "Thy sins are forgiven thee" is also in the mix.

What matter is it what means and measures God chooses to use? When the GLORY of God comes down a person could sing "O' How I Love Jesus" and folk fall to their knees in repentance. Folk repent when they get a revelation of the Glory of God. This is what Isaiah did in Isaiah 6. Also when Peter was fishing and the 'wonder' of the big catch at the command of Jesus was manifest... "Depart from me for I am a sinful man." etc.

Folk have to have a revelation of God and that revelation will naturally cause them to examine themselves. This comes when the Glory of God comes down. Their eyes have to be opened by the Spirit that they might 'see'. These things are spiritually discerned.

So often we 'toil' all night and our nets are empty. We can put in a red net or a green net or a yellow net and all other sorts of things and we are nothing without a verifiable manifestation of God's Glory. Just His very presence. I wonder what would happen some time if we would step out at the leading of the Spirit some place and instead of doing what we have done in the past (that often yields little more than outrage), we would bow to our knees and just begin to pray for the presence of God to come down. Just His manifest Glory!

The church has argued about measures and means for centuries. Finney talks about it in Lectures on Revival. We need the UNCTION and DIRECTION of God. Like Philip in Acts 8. Would to God that He would give us signs and wonders that we might not need signs and banners! No rioting or radicalness. We could eat Dung Cakes and lay on our side for years pointing at a sign. The prophets did [i]radical[/i] things. We could even cut ourselves in the sight of the sun like the Prophets of Baal for a show. We could yodle, gargle, juggle and drink a glass of ice water at the same time to get a crowd, but all we got is a circus.

Oh, brother, lets take hold of the HORNS of the altar... lets pray with such focus that, like Elijah, we had put our heads between our knees. Whatever the Lords leads! No offerings He has not required, but a willingness to do what he asks no matter how simple or radical.

Brothers and sisters, at the end of the day the question is not about how 'timid' or 'radical' our measures are, its about one thing, "Is this what God is saying to do?" Is this what the Holy Ghost has ordered? The Battle is NOT ours, it is the LORD's! The sling did not kill Goliath. The rock did not kill Goliath! GOD killed Goliath and GOD has to MOVE or we are wasting ourselves.

I don't know for sure about the things lazarus mentioned about the salvation army, but I do know that they were known for their very unconventional means to save souls. One thing I know for sure that was common was that some soldiers would lie in coffins in the market square and have flour all over them. Then when nobody was expecting it they would jump out and shock everyone and then preach about how they were once dead and now are alive in Jesus.

One thing I know for sure that was common was that some soldiers would lie in coffins in the market square and have flour all over them.

I did this at a street outreach once with a hearst and actual coffin. They are quite comfortable if anyone ever wondered. I was lying on the street and folk came off the city bus and there was the meeting. It was a wonderful time as we prayed for folk who were totally bound to sin. I would only do this if that's what the Lord laid upon our hearts. We did not do that again. If I were to try that without God's favor and I might get killed! ;-)

I did this at a street outreach once with a hearst and actual coffin... If I were to try that without God's favor, I might get killed!

That's funny!...look at the bright side, at leat there would be a handy coffin in a hearse nearby! ;-)

MC

…no Gospel preacher wants to be paired up with the coming unholy….

Great point! Good words and methods can easily get associated with bad things. Recently a Christian children’s camp director told me about a camper who got very distraught and no one knew why. Finally someone approached him and he said, “I had thought that at THIS camp no one would be allowed to swear. And people are swearing here. Some said, ‘Jesus Christ’ ”

Thankfully he had loving counsellors who could set him straight.

…during the rest of their ride to work could not help but be focused on JESUS

I do hope that there weren’t too many children riding down the road who got traumatized seeing all those “Jesus” signs - like that young camper – especially with no one to explain to them that Jesus was a real person and not just a swear word.

PS What if all our good words and methods met a similar fate. I guess the only thing we'd have left to communicate would be the way we live.

Diane

That's funny!...look at the bright side, at least there would be a handy coffin in a hearse nearby!

I thought the same thing. The outreach was targeted at the high number of gang and drug related killings in the area. This was in 1994. The preaching actually [i]reduced[/i] the chaos in the area to almost nothing. Many police officers basically had nothing to do as the preaching, etc. and ministry seem to dispell the madness. It was a real summer hotspot, but while the preaching of the word went on, the evil was held in check. At least for that weekend.

Good point! Good words can be associated with the wrong thing.

This is very true. I think we need to prayerfully consider these things as words are very powerful. They are carriers of thoughts from mind to mind (R.B) and the last thing we need is to be [i]misunderstood[/i]. This is why I think we need clearer direction from God on what 'words', 'statements' and 'measures' we employ as not to be numbered with those whom would cause our good works to be evil spoken of.

Arousing ANGER is not the objective in preaching. I was thinking this morning how Finney talked about two types of people that are very difficult to reach; a person drunk, and a person angry. An angry person is not in a frame of mind to hear Good News. A drunk person needs to be sobered either natuarally or by the Holy Spirit. Getting a person angry flys in the face of Finney's "He that winneth Souls is wise."

Ed. add. "Winning Souls Requires Wisdom"

[i]If possible, where you wish to converse with a man on the subject of salvation, take him when he is in a good temper. If you find him out of humor, very probably he will get angry and abuse you. Better let him alone for that time, or you will be likely to quench the Spirit. It is possible you may be able to talk in such a way as to cool his temper, but it is not likely. The truth is, men hate God, and though their hatred may be dormant, it is easily excited, and if you bring God fully before their minds when they are already excited with anger, it will be so much the easier to arouse their enmity to open violence.[/i] (CGF)

Jesse said:

Militant evangelism is the call of the day.

Def'n of militant:
1. Fighting or warring.
2. Having a combative character; aggressive, especially in the service of a cause: a militant political activist.

Is this what you mean, or are you using the word differently?

Diane

“We fear that our two pictures of last month greatly shocked a few of our good reader’s whose souls are tender towards the established Church of our day; but we do not in any degree apologize to them because the shock, like that of a cold bath early in the morning, will do them good, and strengthen their constitutions. We can assure them that they cannot be one-half’ so much shocked by our ridicule of error as we are by the error itself’. We do not make the evil, we only expose it; and if we use words and symbols which strike and stick, and’ even offend, we believe that they are necessary, and ought to be used far more frequently. We are not going to handle the abominations of the present American establishment with kid gloves; and if we judge sarcasm and ridicule to be deserved, we shall give the Lord’s enemies their full quota of scorn.”

I really like this quote!

The church needs to do something! We're seeing more unsaved people by the day and growing.

Like Ravenhill said our theology of 'hell' is all on the black board.

I wish to look again at this quote from Finney because I believe we may have two different competing objectives were talking about.

If the objective is to;[i]"...only expose it; and if we use words and symbols which strike and stick, and’ even offend, we believe that they are necessary, and ought to be used far more frequently. We are not going to handle the abominations of the present American establishment with kid gloves; and if we judge sarcasm and ridicule to be deserved, we shall give the Lord’s enemies their full quota of scorn.”[/i]

This sounds almost like calling down fire from heaven. This is an attitude of mockery and jesting. What doth it profit to become learned, experienced, even proficient at winning arguments and heaping ridicule upon a sinners head? Do you not know that they are unstable as it is? They are in a state of spiritual suicide already and you are encouraging them to pull the trigger and release their FULL ON hatred of God. Is this the role of an ambassador? Is this how we reconcile sinners to God?

If possible, where you wish to converse with a man on the subject of salvation, take him when he is in a good temper. If you find him out of humor, very probably he will get angry and abuse you. [u]Better let him alone for that time, or you will be likely to quench the Spirit.[/u] It is possible you may be able to talk in such a way as to cool his temper, but it is not likely. The truth is, men hate God, and though their hatred may be dormant, it is easily excited, and if you bring God fully before their minds when they are already excited with anger, it will be so much the easier to arouse their enmity to open violence. (CGF)

The attitude I first quoted is not winning the lost it is causing folk who may well be considering coming to Christ to, in Finney's words, quench the Holy Spirit. It is a STUMBLING block wrapped in religious garb and rhetoric.

Lets look at this from Finney's prespective for a moment. [u]The truth is, men hate God, and though their hatred may be dormant, it is easily excited, and if you bring God fully before their minds when they are already excited with anger, it will be so much the easier to arouse their enmity to open violence.[/u]

Now, why would we want to send a person into a near rage under the pretense of Good News? This is plain enough, if you anger a person they are in no state of mind to turn to Christ. The Gospel tends to anger a person enough without bringing our own personal gas can to the message. It is not necessary to be rebuking folk all the time. It all sounds the more like picking a fight with sinners to me.

Jesse, I see a good heart at work here, and a thinking mind. Now, if I may… I’d like to nudge a few points along.

the truth, unaltered and unadulterated by men for their own glory, is sharp and can be shocking to those who never hear it.

We must not seek to soften the blow and dull the sharp corners and edges of the truth to make it more acceptable

A prophet once shared an experience: God revealed to him that a man was hiding rotten apples in the bottom of the crates. Rather than say out right, “God told me that you are hiding bad apples”, he was led to tell the man about an incident where a dishonest man was caught, charged and put to jail. This has a much more powerful effect. Jesus used parables in a similar way.

but we Christians of this dark age, and the Church of this generation, must awaken the sleeping multitudes around us for Jesus.

Okay, I realise that’s not a Bible story. Yet…

Jesus talks about an evil spell too: ‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not understand…. For this people’s hearts have become calloused.” Matt. 13: 11 This spell can never be broken by the force of any man. It requires a kiss by the Prince - you know what I mean. I ask, Will forceful “shouting” and a raw declaration of their sins awaken the slumbering princess? Perhaps there is more power in the subtle ways. We leave room for the conscience to process the info.

I am not talking about preaching in a way to intentionally make people angry

but rather preaching the truth of the bible, in the way commanded by the bible...

It's hard to win when trust you are an outsider. Hudson Taylor understood that.

regardless of the reactions of men.

The word is sharp and serious. It's sharper then any doubled sword.

Here’s a another sharp statement from Scripture: “If you want to be great in God’s kingdom, learn to be the servant of all.” ...
Are you kidding!!! Not me!!! ...
We aren’t too keen to preach from a slave position like Paul did. We feel better asserting our “authority” over the sinner. After all, we have the goods and they don’t.

Here’s one of the sharpest statements in the Bible: “Seek FIRST the Kingdom of God…” This is one of the most ignored commands.

Hey, if we Christians can’t handle sharp words like these, then how can we expect non-Christians to handle sharp words!! After all, we Christians should be accustomed to convicting truth. If we get defensive if someone challenges our actions and beliefs, then we can’t expect non-Christians to just eat up the charges we lay on them.

Unfortunately many sharp statements in Scritpure have been dulled through chronic use of insincere repetitions –ex: in sweet praise songs, prayers, and nice sayings. So, how do we wake up the dead words? .....Oh, if only there was a method that works? I’m afraid we need the kiss of the Prince.

But I fear many preachers have dulled the Sword of God to make it more pleasing and acceptable unto men.

This is not reconciling the world unto God, but this is reconciling God unto the world. That was what I wanted to come against.

I was not trying to promote, excuse, or justify any sort of insulting or inflammatory preaching.

Consider this: “They don’t care how much you know until they KNOW how much you care.

God bless you Jesse. May you continue to have courage.

Diane

Jesse,

There is nothing foundationally wrong with your article when applying the definition you have given of Shock and Awe. With that said, the application or misapplication of the article COULD be very wrong. For instance, we know that you will be speaking at the SOAP conference along side many hate preachers and false evangelists like Ruben Israel, Jim Gills, Micah Armstrong and others. We also know that you are preaching along side the false evangelist Jed Smock and other unbiblical preachers of hate at Jed’s “2006 Second Annual School of Evangelism”. Now if you were to give this teaching at one these hate and false evangelism conferences you will be attending and speaking at knowing that these hate preachers will use this teaching to justify their ANTI-biblical tactics and preaching then it is CLEARLY WRONG and you would be guilty of strengthening the hands of the wicked and in my opinion a coworker of the devil even if the teaching itself was not inherently wrong, just the intentional misapplication. I am not saying that this is what you will do when you preach and fellowship with these false evangelists and hate preachers, who you refer to as “like minded brothers” But since much of this article was taken from their own attempts to justify their ANTI-biblical techniques, I fear this may be the case.

Robert Wurtz II wrote a series recently titled “Putting the GOODNESS and GLADNESS back into the GOSPEL” of which the ones entitled “EUAGGELIZO” and “Blocking The Gates - Are You A Gate Blocker” were in my opinion the best.

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=11471&forum=40&33

These articles were very well written and right on if taken with balance. Now if Robert was to go and give these teachings to a group of people that he knew preached a watered down modern “Jesus loves you and wants to shower you with blessings” “come to Jesus, say a little prayer and claim your blessing” message, then although there is nothing inherently wrong with Roberts writings, in fact they are very good and proclaim much truth, Robert would be guilty of encouraging and promoting false evangelists in their error. The same would be the case with you when you are fellowshipping and preaching with these false evangelists and hate preachers who are a reproach to the name of Christ at these conferences.

I was not trying to promote, excuse, or justify any sort of unnecessary insulting or unbiblical inflammatory preaching.

It seems to me that this statement is at best misleading and deceptive and at worst an outright lie. Just a couple of days ago you defended the preaching of “REPENT YOU FILTHY PERVERTS!” at homosexual parades. You exact quote was –

“I agree. Though this is a very strong statement, I think it's very biblical. Of coarse "repent" is all over the bible, "you" is a direct way of preaching which Jesus and the Apostles engaged in, "filthy" leaves a biblical impression of sin, and "perverts" is a word God uses to describe people.
It's a sharp, severe, shocking, and serious statement. And it's very personal. But I have to agree that it's biblical.”

Can you honestly say that you DO NOT think that preaching; “Repent You Filthy Perverts!” at homosexual parades is “unnecessary insulting or unbiblical inflammatory preaching”??? I am pretty sure from reading Roberts posts that he would consider such preaching and other hate tactics of the Ruben’s and Micah’s and Smock’s as an abomination and as Andrew Strom says “ANTI-biblical”

It seems as you are trying to play both sides of the fence. On one hand trying to appease Robert, Diane and others here on SI, but on the other hand doing exactly what you say you are not doing - trying to promote, excuse, and justify unnecessary insulting or unbiblical inflammatory preaching – by encouraging, fellowshipping with, preaching with and calling the likes of Ruben, Jed Smock, Micah Armstrong and other hate preachers “likeminded brothers”. You even went as far to post this very article on Jed Smocks website and it will be certainly taken as a justification, promotion and excuse for their unbiblical inflammatory and hateful preaching. The way you have used this article to play both sides of the fence is dead WRONG and in my opinion a blatant lie or at very least misleading and deceptive.

Here is some past SI discussion about Jed Smock

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=11119&forum=35&start=30&viewmode=flat&order=1

Here is a Greg Gordon quote from the above thread

This is a link off Jed Smocks website: http://www.brojed.org/friendlies.html

Things like this are ridiculous and bringing shame to the name of Christ:
-----
ATTENTION WATCHMEN

THE WICKED WILL SOON BE PRANCING IN OUR STREETS AND THEREFORE MUST BE WARNED, SO GO STAND IN THE GAP. DO NOT WITNESS, DO NOT SING, DO NOT BEFRIEND, DO NOT JUSTIFY, DO NOT JUST PRAY, DO NOT JUST TEACH AGAINST THEM IN CHURCH…….GO…….GO……. CHARGE…….RUN……..RUSH THE ENEMY…….CONFRONT THE DARKNESS WITH LIGHT…….ATTACK GOD’S FOE WITH BOLDNESS AND TRUTH (2TIM.4:2).

from:
http://www.officialstreetpreachers.com/HOMO%20TIME/HOMOTIME.html (Ruben Israel’s website)
_________________
SermonIndex.net Administrator - Greg Gordon

As far the preaching of Josef and other who participate in the inner-city outreach in Detroit, I am surprised that some feel such unction and John the Baptist style preaching is wrong. But I am willing to hear what anyone has to say, that is why I post those videos. The message that Josef preached was a message of life and the resurrection power of Jesus Christ to raise us from death in sin, to victory over sin in Jesus. And I know that people were set free and delivered from sin as a result of this message. With that being said, PLEASE everyone check out this video and see if there is anything unbiblical about this message and provide Scripture for your response.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=L0DYT8X-HO8&search=open%20air%20preach

As I have stated this is the reason that I post these videos. It is important to us that we stay beyond reproach and sometimes others may see thing that we do not. So here is a link to the rest of the videos and PLEASE check them out and let me know what you think or if you find any Biblical error in the preaching or messages.

http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=patricke123

We are not preaching to be people pleasers but as I said we do realize others may see things we do not and we recognize the Biblical importance of being beyond reproach.

Jesse you have completely missed the point. It seems to have gone right over your head. I am not talking about style of preaching. Personally I don’t care about style. You can preach like Art Katz or Zac Poonen in a calm level tone or you can preach with fire and passion like Paris Reidhead or Dave Wilkerson screaming at the top of you lungs like Josef did at times in the video link. (have you ever heard Ten Shekels And A Shirt or Another Gospel with Wilkerson and Reidhead screaming at the top of their lungs in the unction of the Holy Spirit?) What I am talking about is people who preach as Andrew Strom said an “ANTI-biblical” message and as Greg Gordon said “bringing shame to the name of Christ” this is irrelevant of there style. Greg, Andrew, KingJimmy myself and many others on this forum have no problem condemning anti-biblical and shameful methods and messages these false evangelist preach, but you claim to be like minded with these unbiblical and false evangelists and then misrepresent yourself trying to play both sides of the fence.

Answer this question Jesse – What would you think if Ron Luce said he was looking forward to fellowshipping with likeminded brothers like Jesse Duplantis and Kenneth Copeland and then preached a message that strengthened them in their error and encouraged them in their delusions?

This is in fact the same thing you are doing and at the same time trying to cover up with clever words. Ruben and Jed are certainly just as bad if not worse then Duplantis and Copeland.

Now I agree about preaching at conferences and not turning down offers to speak. I would personally speak at SOAP conference, the false evangelist Jed Smocks conference, Duplantis or Copelands conference, but I assure you that I would be along side my brother Paul Washer in not being invited back and I most certainly would not be a co-worker of devil and strengthen the hands of the wicked and false prophets. Can you imagine Elijah preaching along side the false prophets of his day and strengthening them in their error? Of course not, he took them to the river and slew them. Are Jed and Ruben and Duplantis and Copeland modern day false prophets of Baal? Absolutely!

See Jesse you have completely missed the point. The point is as I previously stated –

It seems as you are trying to play both sides of the fence. On one hand trying to appease Robert, Diane and others here on SI, but on the other hand doing exactly what you say you are not doing - trying to promote, excuse, and justify unnecessary insulting or unbiblical inflammatory preaching – by encouraging, fellowshipping with, preaching with and calling the likes of Ruben, Jed Smock, Micah Armstrong and other hate preachers “likeminded brothers”. You even went as far to post this very article on Jed Smocks website and it will be certainly taken as a justification, promotion and excuse for their unbiblical inflammatory and hateful preaching. The way you have used this article to play both sides of the fence is dead WRONG and in my opinion a blatant lie or at very least misleading and deceptive.
When you post such articles on websites like Jed’s and here at the same time you appear to be double minded and are strengthening the hands of these wicked men who bring shame to the name of Christ. Your affiliation with such men and your justification of their unbiblical preaching and techniques casts a dark shadow over yourself as well as your ministry. It would be best to completely disassociate yourself with these men who shame the name of Christ and preach against their abominable tactics instead of encouraging, strengthening and justifying their shameful actions.
Jesse, please accept this in the spirit it was written NOT as an attack against you or your ministry, but as words of correction spoken frankly, but nonetheless out of love and concern and a call for repentance and correction.

Now you can continue to try to justify things like preaching, “REPENT YOU FILTHY PERVERTS!” at homosexual parades and encourage and strengthen false evangelist in their error if so wish to do so, but please don’t hide what you are doing behind lies and deceptions and remember this, that you have warned by many brothers who care for you and wish see you brought to correction and repentance. You are treading down a slipper path that leads to self-delusion and brings shame and reproach to the name of Jesus Christ.

I do not agree with everything Jed and Ruben have said and done when they have open air preached. And I will not practice or preach some of the things they have because I don't agree with it. But I also know them on a personal level and will not publicly condemn them. In my judgment they are honest and sincere.

Dear Jesse,

Jed and Ruben are blatant false evangelists without dispute. Many saints will agree with me on that, and I think the Holy Ghost does as well. Since you are preaching at the upcoming shock and awe conference on John the Baptist and prophetic preaching, let's examine you under the light of this, and in the example of Elijah (whose mantle John had). You should be able to relate since you are preaching on it.

You said that Jed and Ruben are "honest and sincere". I state that so were the prophets of Baal when contending with Elijah. They prayed, cried, and even cut themselves in their sincerity to get fire to fall down from heaven to consume their sacrifice. They truly and sincerely and honestly thought they were right. Did they not? In the same way, just because somebody may seem "honest and sincere" does not mean they are true any more than it did for the prophets of Baal.

What true prophet did not speak against the error of his day? There are very, very few indeed. And the religious crowd who profess to stand for God but were in blatant error were ALWAYS the cheif target of their rebuke, NOT the heathens on the streets. Where are the Elijah's of God? Where's the Jeremiah's, Isaiah's, and John the Baptists??? It has always been the false prophets who refuse to stand uncompromisingly for truth and who compromise their message in order to gain the approval of others. Jesse, you personally said that one of the reasons you don't speak against Jed Smock's tactics and the like and the reason you fellowship with him in his conferences is because you don't get very many speaking invitations, so when you do, you take them up and try to keep them. Does it not grieve you that such a one is reproaching the name of Christ?! Or are you that blind that you don't see it??!

Last week, I wrote you a personal letter of rebuke (for lack of a better term) and you totally ignored it and didn't answer any of my questions. You still have not responded to any of my points and questions. In it I wrote this regarding you preaching at the conferences of false teachers who reproach the name of Christ:

Are you going to these conferences to preach against their abominable tactics? Are you going there to lift up a prophetic voice like a trumpet and voicing the broken heart of God over these things? You have no right whatsoever to preach about John the Baptist style prophetic preaching if you compromise in such a way. Is that what Elijah would do, compromise in order to get more speaking engagements? OR, rather than that, are you going to find one of the subjects you agree with these guys on, totally compromise, and preach something they want to hear? Or worse yet, do you agree with their tactics, because as of yet, you have not even stated whether or not you agree or disagree with the tactics of Jed and Ruben and the like? It appears that you do agree with them based on what you have posted on Jed's message board. These men are false evangelists and totally reproach the name of Jesus Christ. It's a blatant shame. The word says to have nothing to do with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. Are you going to these places to reprove them? Or are you going to preach alongside them on things you agree on with total compromise? Do you not feel the burning, holy, intensely fierce jealousy of the Holy Ghost over the name of Jesus Christ being given all the glory He so rightfully deserves? When these men reproach the name of Jesus through their false anti-biblical methods, the Holy Ghost grieves with fiery jealousy and burning envy over the name of Christ.
When you spoke with Pratney and Ravenhill, did you tell them that you would not preach against the false methods of those who slander the name of Christ with their sick preaching? That instead, you would join up alongside them and preach only on the things you agree with them on in order that you may get more speaking engagements and keep the ones you already have??? If you did, and they still gave you that advice, then they are wrong. I don't care if the Apostle Paul himself gave you that advice, he would be wrong too. But maybe next time you ask them, you should state your question in clearer terms because I doubt you stated it in such clear terms.

Jesse, why do you refuse to answer me? It appears that once it is brought out in public the only reason you answer is to protect your ministry once these things are brought to the light. So previously you responded along these lines by saying this:

So I won't preach against all the preachers that I do not like. I sought councel from Winkie Pratney about this and he said "some call it cowardise, but I call it Christian." I will speak against all practices and teaches that I believe are wrong and unbiblical, but will not turn my ministry into a ministry that is always publicly rebuking and criticising other ministers.

Jesse, though you totally compromise the truth of God's Word to maintain your own personal ministry name and refuse to speak out against error in the tradition of every true prophet down through the ages, this is still not the main problem at hand, it is actually only secondary. The MAJOR problem is that you have:

1. Called these false teachers and false evangelists "like-minded brethren".
2. You preach at their conferences in total agreement with them.
3. You fellowship with them.
4. You communicate with them personally and still don't raise your voice against their false tactics (according to your own words).
5. You fully agree with them except on a few minor points (according to your own words again) 6. You even mimic their practices down to the detail.

To expound on point 6: You have used many sayings and one-liners from Jed Smock and the like, have mimicked the practices of John Duncan from the apologetical presuppositionalism after the world's psuedo-wisdom down to toting the breifcase with stickers on it and wearing suspenders just like him; you have used heretical stories to draw crowds such as the "Dick Jane and Sally" story that's an open reproach to the name of Christ, and you post their reproachful videos on the internet and recommend their ministries to others. It is not that you refuse to preach against them that's the major problem, though it is of much concern. The major problems are the facts that these guys are false teachers and you do all of the above. The Apostle John said that if you even bid such a one "God-speed" you are a partaker of their evil deeds.

I once wrote an article called "Wolve's in Sheep's Clothing." In it I made sure to state that I was not "naming names" but rather was pointing out characteristics that I believed was unbiblical. And that is what I will do. I will preach against things I know to be wrong and will preach for what I know to be right.

What is wrong with naming names? The Apostle John did (see 3 John). As did John the Baptist. The Apostle Paul named the names of false teachers and false brethren often in his epistles. Was he in error and bent on "fault-finding"? In fact, Paul commanded this:

1Ti 5:19 Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.
1Ti 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.
1Ti 5:21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.

Not only two or three witnesses, but many, many true brothers in the Lord testify to the fact that Jed, Ruben, and the like are false evangelists and reproach the name of Christ. Paul commanded that such be rebuked before all that all may fear. Then he charged us with a three-fold command before God, before the Lord Jesus, and before the elect angels so as to add the uttermost weight to this important command to observe these things without partiality. Jesse, you are in error against this scripture and many others. Granted, this scripture is specifically about rules in the church meeting, but no doubt it heavily and very practically applies to this situation at hand. Why don't you preach against those things which are wrong like you said you would?

Be careful Patrick with going around and judging and criticizing other ministries. Because it could come back to you.

Is Patrick the judge or is the Word of God the Judge? Which standard is Patrick using to judge: his own or the Word? If it is just his own and he is making it up to criticize and condemn then he is wrong. But if there is truth in what he is saying and it lines up with the Word then you are wrong. The Word will come back to all of us to judge us without partiality. So which is it?

If we cannot speak out against error by name then Elijah, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and many other prophets were blatantly wrong. If we cannot speak out against error by name then John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and many of the Apostles were wrong. Have you ever heard of George Fox? He was anointed with a tremendous prophetic mantle to preach with power and to rebuke the error of his day, especially within the church. Was he a true prophet or was he a lunatick? Was he in error for going into "steeple houses" and rebuking false ministers to their face? Or was he a man sent from God on a mission? Leonard Ravenhill seems to think he was a true prophet, but according to your words he must be in error?

The fact is Jesse, the Lord does anoint individuals with a prophetic mantle to point out error and rebuke with Heaven's authority. This is a priceless gift to the church. And it is by God's grace that we all have access to the same Spirit of prophecy. Through the Word of God and by the leading of His Spirit we can "judge righteous judgment". We have the authority of the prophets, apostles, our Lord, and the holy scriptures to call out error by name and rebuke it when led by the Lord.

Jesse, you have hardened yourself against the Lord's correction. You seek to call a precious gift of God a "cheap gift" and twist the prophetic mantle into what you deem "fault-finding". There is a huge difference. I fear this may be a fatal mistake to your ministry.

How many genuine and true brothers and saints in the Lord has God sent to you to correct you of your error? Yet you refuse to listen! Every time somebody goes to you to show you your error in love, you harden yourself more and more. You do not love the truth, and therefore, you are in imminent danger of being handed over to your own delusion that you should believe a lie.

I have no need to defend my preaching against your hypocritical double-standards. You say you don’t condemn it and that you won’t speak out against error by name, but then you drag me into this and “fault-find” with my preaching, offering no scripture whatsoever to support your claims. Jesse, my words may seem harsh but I tell you the truth you are in serious error my friend. I will let my preaching stand for itself as it is perfectly available for all to see and it bears good fruit.

On Christ on solid Rock I stand,
All other ground is sinking sand,

-- Josef Urban --

As far the preaching of Josef and other who participate in the inner-city outreach in Detroit, I am surprised that some feel such unction and John the Baptist style preaching is wrong. But I am willing to hear what anyone has to say that is why I post those videos.

Okay, Patrick, I’ll take you up on it.

I watched some of the videos and here are my thoughts - not that they are all correct:

I fear that the lad is going to lose his voice in a few years.
The preacher seems disconnected from his audience. I wonder if he can "hear" the heartbeat of their audience.
These preachers seem to presume that their audience knows who God is, who Jesus is, what the “Word” is, etc. They use a lot of “shop talk” – jargon unfamiliar to most street people.

Where in the Bible are we told to be “John the Baptists” and preach like him? John the Baptist spoke to an audience who had religious knowledge, who know the meaning of baptism (a cultural practise). I fear that some here may have taken the letter of Ravenhill’s messages but not the spirit. We indeed need people who follow Christ and not the world, like John the Baptist, and who speak the words that God gives, in God’s timing. We also need those who spend years with God in the desert before they face the people.

One word especially keeps surfacing in my mind, that I think expresses the overall sentiment of the last few posts:

[b][size=large][color=000099]COPY[/color][/size][/b]

There seems to be a desire to COPY certain styles and people, or avoid COPYING certain styles and people. Perhaps that’s why this thread has wandered into a discussion about names of people and styles. Now, I’m not accusing anyone. That is a natural bent. We all copy right from birth – boys emulate their fathers, girls their mothers, we copy our heroes. That’s how we find our identity. But God moves us beyond that – to where we become ourselves – who God made us. And that takes time.

Some of you preachers are about the age of my youngest child – a babe barely out of the cradle. (my how time flies!) You haven’t had your 40 years in the desert yet.

I would like to meet you all in 40 years, and see what God has been doing in your life. I have faith that He who began a good work will carry it onto completion.” Phil. 1:6

Diane

I'll be praying for you Jesse. You seem to be having a lot of presure coming on you from different sides.

Godspeed,

Josh

I'll be praying for you Jesse. You seem to be having a lot of presure coming on you from different sides.

Me too!

Answer this question Jesse – What would you think if Ron Luce said he was looking forward to fellowshipping with likeminded brothers like Jesse Duplantis and Kenneth Copeland and then preached a message that strengthened them in their error and encouraged them in their delusions?

I use to preach at the top of my voice when I was on the street all the time. Sometimes it's called for, but I've been able to find a steady volume and still have volume to get louder when needed. It has helped me alot. It seems that people are more apt to stop and listen.

This thread is/was about shock and awe evangelism. I'm just about in shock and awe about how so many are calling others false- ie not a Christian.

EDIT: I'm not against calling out false prophets or such. I am just wondering where everyone is gathering there information from to make the judgement.

I just hope that if you call someone false you have seem them yourselves preach, and not just a clip or a quote.

What are the characteristics of a "false evangelist?"

Again Jesse, you are dancing around the question and the truth with clever word games and deceptive speech. Your exact statement was

“It's a great opportunity to fellowship with these brothers like Jim Gilles, Ruben Israel, and John Duncan. Bro Jims been on the campuses 21 years. Ruben been on the streets for 30 years. And Bro John has been open air preaching for over 10 years. It will be a small conference, but it will be potent. I greatly look forward to the fellowship with brothers of like minds.”

So what if Ron had said -

“It's a great opportunity to fellowship with these brothers like Kenneth Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, and Benny Hinn. Bro Copeland been on the TBN for 21 years. Jesse Duplantis has been in the pulpit for 30 years. And Benny Hinn has been healing for over 10 years. It will be a small conference, but it will be potent. I greatly look forward to the fellowship with brothers of like minds.”

So are you saying that DO NOT consider Ruben, Jed, Micah, John Gills and these other who shame the name of Christ and bring reproach to His name to be likeminded brothers – or are you saying - you DO consider Ruben, Jed, Micah, John Gills and these other who shame the name of Christ and bring reproach to His name to be likeminded brothers???????????? Which is it Jesse????? Don’t do a clever dance and game with a play on words but be honest.

If your answers is something like "I don't agree with everything they do but....." Would apply the same statement to Copeland, Duplantis, Hinn??? If not then what is the difference??? They all bring shame to the name of Christ.

But more importantly will you preach as to confirm and justify and strengthen these men in their error who bring shame to Jesus or will you speak strongly against the shame and reproach they bring to Jesus?? Or do you agree with them and think they are not bring shame to Christ but are actually brothers???

Can you imagine John the Baptist or the Apostle Paul or Jesus or Isaiah or Jeremiah going to a conference of false prophets and evangelist who bring shame to the name of God and being invited back the next year???? I think not! I think all these men along with the like of George Fox, Wesley, Finney, Whitefield would blister the wall with their words preaching with a Holy jealousy for the name and the glory of the Almighty God.

Can you honestly say that you DO NOT think that preaching; “Repent You Filthy Perverts!” at homosexual parades is “unnecessary insulting or unbiblical inflammatory preaching”??? Now you can continue to try to justify things like preaching, “REPENT YOU FILTHY PERVERTS!” at homosexual parades and encourage and strengthen false evangelist in their error if so wish to do so, but please don’t hide what you are doing behind lies and deceptions and remember this, that you have warned by many brothers who care for you and wish see you brought to correction and repentance. You are treading down a slipper path that leads to self-delusion and brings shame and reproach to the name of Jesus Christ.

Jesse, please accept this in the spirit it was written NOT as an attack against you or your ministry, but as words of correction spoken frankly, but nonetheless out of love and concern and a call for repentance and correction.

So are you saying that DO NOT consider Ruben, Jed, Micah, John Gills and these other who shame the name of Christ and bring reproach to His name to be likeminded brothers – or are you saying - you DO consider Ruben, Jed, Micah, John Gills and these other who shame the name of Christ and bring reproach to His name to be likeminded brothers???????????? Which is it Jesse????? Don’t do a clever dance and game with a play on words but be honest.

If your answers is something like "I don't agree with everything they do but....." Would apply the same statement to Copeland, Duplantis, Hinn??? If not then what is the difference??? They all bring shame to the name of Christ.

But more importantly will you preach as to confirm and justify and strengthen these men in their error who bring shame to Jesus or will you speak strongly against the shame and reproach they bring to Jesus?? Or do you agree with them and think they are not bring shame to Christ but are actually brothers???

Can you imagine John the Baptist or the Apostle Paul or Jesus or Isaiah or Jeremiah going to a conference of false prophets and evangelist who bring shame to the name of God and being invited back the next year????

Can you honestly say that you DO NOT think that preaching; “Repent You Filthy Perverts!” at homosexual parades is “unnecessary insulting or unbiblical inflammatory preaching”???

[b]Jesse, can you please stop dancing over words and answer these questions??? Let's show some intergrity here and be honest and up front. What are your answers?[/b]

Patrick,

I am just curious but what exactly does Ron Luce have to do with this. Sure Jesse may have been mentored by him, but Jesse is not Ron Luce. Also, What if Ron Luce was good friends with benny Hinn but still preached the truth? Would Ron Luce be false teacher because he was friends with Benny Hinn? Jesus was the friend of sinners, did that make Him a false teacher? OF COURSE NOT.

Also if you are refering to the quote on Jesse's board, "repent you filthy perverts", I posted that quote. Show me how that is not biblical. I would never say it but it is biblical nevertheless. I have heard it used and it is rather useful if used in the right context.

Please allow me to answer some of these, they look like they would be interesting to pull apart.I am studying philosophy pretty deeply so I will practice on these. ;D

So are you saying that DO NOT consider Ruben, Jed, Micah, John Gills and these other who shame the name of Christ and bring reproach to His name to be likeminded brothers – or are you saying - you DO consider Ruben, Jed, Micah, John Gills and these other who shame the name of Christ and bring reproach to His name to be likeminded brothers???????????? Which is it Jesse????? Don’t do a clever dance and game with a play on words but be honest.

Now, you must presuppose that they are false prophets before you can adequately answer this question. We all have the mind of Christ, so I would have to say that they would have a likemindedness to Jesse. Maybe a difference in mothed, but a likeness of mind.

If your answers is something like "I don't agree with everything they do but....." Would apply the same statement to Copeland, Duplantis, Hinn??? If not then what is the difference??? They all bring shame to the name of Christ.

Now doctrine and practice are different things. Duplantis has a brilliant preaching style, but his doctrine is straight from hell. You must differntiate my friend.

Can you imagine John the Baptist or the Apostle Paul or Jesus or Isaiah or Jeremiah going to a conference of false prophets and evangelist who bring shame to the name of God and being invited back the next year????

false dillemma. There is another option, they are not false prophets. They may say you are a false prophet, so who should I beleive? You caould also both be true prophets with a different style. I like the last option.

Also you question is loaded, kind of like "when did you stop beating you wife?"

Just a few thoughts.

This seems much like a witch hunt to me. Ask youselves, are you more concentrated on Jesse or yourselves? You must answer for the way you preach and the doctrine you teach before the judgment seat. You dont answer for Jesse. It only seems logical that you should not fret over someone else when you could very well have to examine yourself. But again, those are my thoughts.

"We must all stand before the judgement deat of Christ"

"Whatsoever He saith unto you do it"

AMEN

Hi everyone.

Would like to bring to our rememberance these commandments concerning Church discipline and correction. I will leave them for us without comment and I do not intend to post them for the purpose of debate or any more strife. Thank you for allowing me this.

from the Holy Scripture:

Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.

A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject.

END.

I would also like to leave us this reminder of the nature of this forum where these things are being discussed and the potential reach of our words.

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=11148&forum=16&start=10&viewmode=flat&order=1]Top 500 spots that access SI[/url]

please see the map on the first post in this thread for more details.

Thank you,

Christopher

Hey, want to hear a crazy story?

While I was in high school this guy had his eyes on me – far more than I wished. He followed me around like a puppy - so much that during noon hours I would hide in the library behind bookshelves, hoping he wouldn’t find me. But he would find me. So, I tried to get rid of him by witnessing profusely to him. Let me tell you, I dumped on him big-time. I even invited him to church, thinking he’d surely see me as too religions and leave me alone.

But after that he got more pesty. He just followed me around more than ever, and asked an endless stream of questions about God and the Bible. I thought he did that just to hang around me. Trust me, I was not gentle with him. I just wanted to get rid of him. So I just kept preaching the Gospel more and more.

Then he started coming to our youth meetings. During a retreat campfire one night I noticed that he was off in the distance. I just knew that he was real serious about Christ. So I ran up to him, and talked with him. He took his step of faith – and believed in Christ. Still today, he is in church.

Now, I don’t suggest reverse psychology. But it does seem that God can make good use of bad motives for preaching the gospel.

Diane

Thanks Chris.

Didn't recognize how far out of hand this had gotten. There is a number of newer members here that would do well to read through the welcome section to understand what SI is attempting here.

This thread will be locked if it continues and those members who cannot grasp the rules laidout asked to leave or removed.