Share with others: |
|
Tweet |
At a recent service, Ms. Osteen commented that, when we offer God our obedience and worship, we do this for the sake of our own happiness rather than for the glory of God.
Like Sterling’s TMZ tape, yes, Osteen’s comments are bad. Yes, the 37-second clip is a rambling mess born from almost incomprehensible Biblical ignorance. Yes, I hope these comments cause Osteen disciples to seriously reconsider their devotion to the most mega of America’s megachurches. But if these words succeed in toppling the Osteen empire, isn’t it a bit anticlimactic when the Osteens have said a thousand things that are even more theologically indefensible during their time at Lakewood Church?
When interviewed, Joel Osteen won’t clearly affirm there is no salvation outside of faith in Christ and seems incapable of articulating a coherent doctrine of repentance. And, as both these clips show, Osteen’s default response to any theologically challenging question is essentially, “Well, whatever the Bible says about this, the important thing for everyone to know is that I’m nice.” So is it bad for one Osteen to tell Christians God wants them to be more concerned with their own happiness than His glory? Absolutely. But this pales in comparison to the other Osteen telling Christians they should be more concerned with mimicking Joel’s unflappable positivity than with knowing what the Word of God actually says.
In their sermons and books, both Joel and Victoria Osteen give full-throated endorsement to the prosperity gospel, a theology which states that those enduring hardships, poverty, and sickness have only their lack of faith and confidence to blame for their suffering. There are, of course, some enormous theological problems with this Christianized version of “The Secret,” where you obtain God’s blessings by speaking them into existence. The first is that it has no basis in the Scriptures and conveniently ignores all of the words that Jesus speaks about the question of suffering, the cost of discipleship, and the blessedness of persecution. The second is that it offers nothing but despair to those who are faithfully enduring the crosses Christ has given them to bear. And the third is that such a doctrine simply doesn’t square with the lives of those who were the first to tell us about God’s blessings in Christ.
But surely [her comments are] a few notches lower on the pole of theological indefensibility than speaking words that, one, say the exact opposite of what the Bible says; two, belittle suffering Christians with the insensitivity a man horking down a hot fudge sundae three inches from the face of a starving child; and, three, imply that St. Peter, St. Paul, and even Jesus Himself must have been really lousy Christians who couldn’t unlock God’s potential blessings.
But what really makes the Osteens’ books and sermons worse than the things they say are the things they don’t say. The Osteens talk about living your best life now and unlocking God’s earthly blessings. But the Osteens don’t talk about the best life won for us in the blood of the Lamb and God’s eternal blessings for those who cling to Christ in faith. The Osteens doesn’t talk about sin. They don’t talk about forgiveness or redemption or atonement. They don’t talk about heaven and hell or the crucifixion and the resurrection. Do you know why a teetotaler’s favorite drinking game is “Take a Shot Every Time Joel Osteen Talks About Jesus?” Because Joel Osteen doesn’t talk about Jesus.
So is it terrible that one of Lakewood Church’s preachers would mislead people into thinking they don’t need to focus on God’s glory? Most definitely. But it’s substantially worse to mislead people into thinking they don’t need to hear about God’s Son, without whom God’s glory could never be ours. And while Victoria Osteen is wrong about the glory of God, if you find those words more unchristian than the Osteen’s unwillingness to proclaim Christ Himself, I’m not sure your understanding of God’s glory is much better.
So when Victoria Osteen says we worship God for our sake and not His, she’s wrong. But she’s not wrong because she’s choosing man instead of God as her answer to the question “for whose benefit do we gather for worship?” Rather, she’s wrong because she’s made an either/or proposition out of the matter. And while it’s perfectly fair to criticize Ms. Osteen for this error and for a shallow, “God just wants you to be happy” theology of praise, I do find this offense rather minor in comparison to the Osteens’ overarching error of “pretty much everything we say is incompatible with the Scriptures and we will never, ever, ever point your eyes to the cross of Christ.”
I’m glad Victoria Osteen’s words are being criticized. I hope it causes people who have been lapping up the Osteen fluff to hunger for the real spiritual food they’ve been denied. But I’d rather see a heavyweight get knocked out with a haymaker than a jab. I’d rather see Al Capone go to jail for murder than for income tax fraud. I’d rather see Donald Sterling lose the Clippers for housing discrimination than for comments from a private conversation. And while it’s indefensible that Ms. Osteen spent 37 seconds preaching her recent nonsense, I’d rather see the Osteen kingdom come toppling down because it spent countless hours not preaching the King of Kings.
Read the original news story here:
The Osteens’ Donald Sterling Moment
Read several authors' thoughts on papal Rome's history.
This article highlights quotes from historical and Catholic sources proving the Papacy's aggressive nature.
An Italian mystic. A minister to a British king. An Augustine monk. A Swiss farmer's boy. What do these men have in common? They were used by God in powerful ways to bring about the Protestant Reformation. Enter into the lives of these ordinary people with extraordinary stories.
Inspiration for these articles comes from Gideon and Hilda Hagstoz' Heroes of the Reformation