RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Church



Message

cybrjewls -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/3/2008 8:04:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: .prophetic.

Please show me how you

explain 1 peter 3:18-22; I think you forgot to mention it.


Nope. I didn't see it. You embedded three scriptures? When you do that, how am I supposed to know that there were 3 and not 2? I would have to click on each part of the sentence and see if a new link comes up. If you want me to discuss three scriptures, you might just post the references plainly or tell me outright that you embedded 3 scriptures so that I will know not to miss one of them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: .prophetic.

Please show me how you

explain 1 peter 3:18-22; I think you

forgot to mention it.


Nope. I didn't see it. You embedded three scriptures? When you do that, how am I supposed to know that there were 3 and not 2? I would have to click on each part of

the sentence and see if a new link comes up. If you want me to discuss three

scriptures, you might just post the references plainly or tell me outright that you embedded 3 scriptures so that I will know not to miss one of them.

1 Peter 3:18-22

There a number of interpretations that people give. Frankly, I don't know for certain


So, why be upset, then, if anyone interprets differently. For instance, Christ left His Spirit into The Father's Hands at the cross, descended to the lower earthly regions as written. He preached to all of the spirits in prison who were disobedient from the time of the fall at the tree. For God Is Spirit as it is written. For it is written concerning 'sheol' and 'hades'; the places of the dead. For it is written: the rich man went to hades, but Lazarus was comforted in the bossom of Abraham. For it is written: 'hades' was thrown into the lake of fire, also known as 'Hell' or Gehena, in revelation, after the Great White Throne Judgment of the opening of the books and the Book of Life. For it is written: I will give to each according to whay they have done. Gehena is hell; the second death. But, apparently, we will go directly to hades or 'the bossom of Abraham' in accordance with the teaching regarding the rich man and Lazarus. And, yet, there is still 'sheol' where the souls rest until they are raised to life in the second resurrection.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/3/2008 8:29:59 PM)

quote:

So, why be upset, then, if anyone interprets differently.


I'm not, not in the least. But if I were, would I be wrong? Jesus was angry at those who rebelled against Him. He was angry at those who stood in the way of people who would believe in Him.

quote:

For instance, Christ left His Spirit into The Father's Hands at the cross, descended to the lower earthly regions as written.


Let's see. His "Spirit" went to God while He went somewhere else? Does that make sense?

quote:

For God Is Spirit as it is written. For it is written concerning 'sheol' and 'hades'; the places of the dead. For it is written: the rich man went to hades, but Lazarus was comforted in the bossom of Abraham. For it is written: 'hades' was thrown into the lake of fire, also known as 'Hell' or Gehena, in revelation, after the Great White Throne Judgment of the opening of the books and the Book of Life. For it is written: I will give to each according to whay they have done. Gehena is hell; the second death. But, apparently, we will go directly to hades or 'the bossom of Abraham' in accordance with the teaching regarding the rich man and Lazarus. And, yet, there is still 'sheol' where the souls rest until they are raised to life in the second resurrection.


Do you ever check the Greek lexicon? "Sheol" comes from a Hebrew term and it has several meanings. People typically attribute the meaning that they have heard all of their lives without actually studying what it meant at the time it was written. And often some meaning that they feel subjectively, regardless of context or any other logical reason. They get this "by revelation" and are taught heresy by ignorant people who lead them astray.

It also meant "the grave," referring to the earth in which Jesus was entombed. In Acts 2:27-30, Peter was simpy saying that Jesus didn't decompose but rather was resurrected. Nothing more. But somehow the other meaning (more vague and less definite) to invent an interpretation that Jesus somehow "traveled spiritually" to the nether regions.

Joyce Meyers (and possibly some others, I don't know) have taught that people cannot be saved without believing that. Does that sound like the gospel to you?



cybrjewls -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/3/2008 9:02:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker



It also meant "the grave," referring to the earth in which Jesus was entombed. In Acts 2:27-30, Peter was simpy saying that Jesus didn't decompose but rather was resurrected. Nothing more. But somehow the other meaning (more vague and less definite) to invent an interpretation that Jesus somehow "traveled spiritually" to the nether regions.

Joyce Meyers (and possibly some others, I don't know) have taught that people cannot be saved without believing that. Does that sound like the gospel to you?


Again, The Spirit brings Life, the flesh counts for nothing. That Jesus left His body at the cross is written. That Jesus descended to the lower earthly regions is written. That Jesus was resurrected is written. That Jesus appeared to many people on earth for 40 days is written. That Jesus ascended into Heaven and Is seated at The Right Hand of God is written. That Jesus will return, again, to Reign in the Millennium is written. That those who are Martyrs; from across all times; for The Testimony of Jesus Christ will be resurrected in the first resurrection and Reign with Him as priests is written.

The whole Counsel of Scripture Is Gospel. For Gospel means 'God's News'. Everything that is written Is Gospel and useful for correcting, training ones self in righteousness that comes by faith in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior.



colliefan -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/3/2008 10:50:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: .prophetic.

Dearest GrahamCracker; Hello in The Lord Jesus Christ! Please notice that Scriptures do not teach that everyone will not have to give an account for every stray word they have spoken. The Word of God is like the force of gravity. It applies to everyone, equally; in the manner in which God so desires it to on earth.


Matthew 12:36 (ESV) 36I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak,



GrahamCracker -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/4/2008 7:35:27 AM)

quote:

The whole Counsel of Scripture Is Gospel. For Gospel means 'God's News'. Everything that is written Is Gospel and useful for correcting, training ones self in righteousness that comes by faith in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior.


In the broadest sense that is true. But you know what I mean.

She said that one can't be saved unless one believes that Jesus suffered torments in hell. That is NOT the gospel. That is, in fact, a lie that the prosperity people made up out of whole cloth.

Galatians 1, "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed."



cybrjewls -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/4/2008 11:38:01 AM)

Hello! This thread is about Hank. I think we derailed it a little; sorry.

I care very little what people seem to be in this world is what Paul taught. All that matters is faith expressing itself through love.

Hank said, though, that Jesus did not endure the sufferings in accordance with the prophecy of Isaiah: After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.

Also the Apostle instructs his brother in The Lord, Timothy: He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions...

But: Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

quote:

The whole Counsel of Scripture Is Gospel. For Gospel means 'God's News'. Everything that is written Is Gospel and useful for correcting, training ones self in righteousness that comes by faith in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior.


In the broadest sense that is true. But you know what I mean.

She said that one can't be saved unless one believes that Jesus suffered torments in hell. That is NOT the gospel. That is, in fact, a lie that the prosperity people made up out of whole cloth.

Galatians 1, "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed."



GrahamCracker -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/4/2008 1:37:17 PM)

quote:

Hello! This thread is about Hank. I think we derailed it a little; sorry.


No. I'm still on Hank. Where do you think I got the information about Joyce Meyer's teaching?

quote:

Hank said, though, that Jesus did not endure the sufferings in accordance with the prophecy of Isaiah: After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.


You don't think that refers to the emotional anguish Jesus endured? I didn't hear the broadcast in question, but I think you're just trying to find something wrong with Hand just to find something wrong with Hank. I don't think Hank would deny Jesus had emotional distress when He suffered.

I am familiar with biblical hermeneutics.

We can quibble whether or not Hank was saying there was ONLY physical suffering but no emotional distress. I'm suggesting that Hank was distinguishing between the suffering at the cross (both physical and emotional)-- and suffering in some hellish realm. Contextually, I'm betting that he believes emotional distress and physical pain were the types of suffering Jesus endured on the cross. Terms like "suffering of his soul" and "my soul longs for" and "my soul is sorrowful unto death" are biblical idioms referring to emotional distress and often referring to what we would call anxiety or emotional depression. They are references to the condition of one's emotions, not the location of one's spirit/soul in the afterlife.

Edit/addendum: The use of the Hebrew word for "soul" also refers to life. I can cite some scriptures for you demonstrating that. But in that case, the scripture you reference would be saying that the Father seeing the affliction on Jesus' life (i.e. the taking of His life), it would then support Hank's view that the scripture means that the suffering of the crucifixion involved the taking of Jesus life.

It is not a denial of scripture but a difference in interpretation that less-than-educated people usurp when they have their own hermaneutic agenda.

quote:

Also the Apostle instructs his brother in The Lord, Timothy: He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions...


That ought to be considered in context. Paul did question the truth and sincerity of heretics. You don't make peace with people who are teaching false doctrine. You either call them to repent or warn the people not to listen to them. He said of the Judaizers "I would that the circumcizers would go so far as to cut it off..." That's pretty strong language. It's rather risque when you consider what Paul really meant. He would certainly not be called a peace-maker under the conditions that you are suggesting. You don't think Paul would contradict himself do you?

What about the strong language that the prosperity teachers use towards Hank? Some have "prophesied" that God would punish Hank and others. Was that peaceful? I don't think so.



earthless -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/4/2008 3:33:13 PM)

Has any source been posted yet about what prophetic claims Hank said? Just wondering.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/4/2008 4:12:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

Has any source been posted yet about what prophetic claims Hank said? Just wondering.


Do you mean personal revelation or his view of prophecy and the conclusions proceeding from it?



Digrieze -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/4/2008 6:53:45 PM)

No source cited yet (as far as I have noticed), however, Hannegraff has addressed this before. There is an old heresy that was addressed at Nicia and Chalcedon in the ecumenical councils that has resurfaced in the late 1940's under the "latter rain" teachers. Specifically, this heresy holds that "Jesus" (man) and "Christ" (God) were two separate persons that temporarily inhabited the same corporal body. Since God is eternal, "Christ" left the body of "Jesus" and "Jesus" (the man) suffered and died alone on the cross. Different versions of the heresy have "the Christ" standing by the cross laughing at the man or going to "hell" to preach the gospel to the dead. After 3 days the Christ raised Jesus as he raised Lazarus, but the two were unique and separate, thereby explaining why some could recognize him, along with the wounds of the crucifixtion, and some could not.

This was one of the Gnostic heresy main points in the second and third centuries and seems to get recycled. (oh heck, call it what it is, a lie of SATAN designed to deceive those that know enough of the Bible to be familiar with the words but not discipled enough to recognize the lie).

Hannegraff (and others) have addressed this point many times and I suspect it is the seed of this discussion.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/4/2008 9:54:03 PM)

Digrieze,

If I understand you correctly, Gnosticism doesn't sound like a related teaching. Of course, there is always the possibility that I am off track regarding the teachings of either.

One kind of Gnosticism (I am going by memory from things I have read) taught that the human form of Jesus was inhabited by the "Christ spirit" until the crucifixion. It then deserted the human form to suffer alone on the cross.

The teachings of some of these prosperity teachers is such that Jesus was a human with a literal soul/spirit that essentially was Him. The physical suffering was real and there was anguish that was as real as could be. Upon death, the soul/spirit left for three days and fought Satan and the demons in the underworld until He overcame them. Then He returned to the surface to reinhabit the physical form that then resulted in the resurrection of the body.

In all of the better known forms of Gnosticism, the material realm was thought to be inherently evil and therefore undesirable. In that sense, the physical resurrection of Christ from the dead would not be a good thing. It would differ from the prosperity teachers in that all of the prosperity teachers that I am aware of teach that Jesus did literally rise from the dead just as the scriptures teach. And the prosperity teachers do not believe that the material realm is evil. In fact, they teach quite the opposite--that material things and the possession of them is an evidence of God's blessing upon us--and therefore desirable.



cybrjewls -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/6/2008 9:39:01 AM)

Hello in The Grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! This heresy sounds like what some 'Muslims' teach regarding the death of The Lord. Some say that Judas was crucified and not Christ.

As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead. But it is written that the final death is the second death. For apart from Him we can do nothing, and whatever we do, we do as unto The Lord. For His Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." And we are His workmanship and the handiwork of His creating in Christ unto good fruits in keeping with righteousness that what was done will be shown on The Day of Judgment to have been done through God. What was done through God will remain, what was done that is burned up will cause one to suffer loss. They, themselves, escape through the fire; though as it is written. For each persons 'work' will be tested by fire. At that time each will receive his praise from God. For, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God.

Jesus is the easy Master, He leads them through green pastures (spiritual provisions) and still waters (peace).

Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Digrieze

No source cited yet (as far as I have noticed), however, Hannegraff has addressed this before. There is an old heresy that was addressed at Nicia and Chalcedon in the ecumenical councils that has resurfaced in the late 1940's under the "latter rain" teachers. Specifically, this heresy holds that "Jesus" (man) and "Christ" (God) were two separate persons that temporarily inhabited the same corporal body. Since God is eternal, "Christ" left the body of "Jesus" and "Jesus" (the man) suffered and died alone on the cross. Different versions of the heresy have "the Christ" standing by the cross laughing at the man or going to "hell" to preach the gospel to the dead. After 3 days the Christ raised Jesus as he raised Lazarus, but the two were unique and separate, thereby explaining why some could recognize him, along with the wounds of the crucifixtion, and some could not.

This was one of the Gnostic heresy main points in the second and third centuries and seems to get recycled. (oh heck, call it what it is, a lie of SATAN designed to deceive those that know enough of the Bible to be familiar with the words but not discipled enough to recognize the lie).

Hannegraff (and others) have addressed this point many times and I suspect it is the seed of this discussion.



cognitivemagic -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/15/2008 10:50:25 PM)

I believe that Hank, in regards to Christ's passion, speaks more generally that the Person of Christ indeed suffered.

At least, that's how I remember him speaking about this.

Also, Hank is not a "full-preterist" by any stretch of the imagination. I believe that he's condemned that position on-air on the B.A.M.

However, I do think that Hank's claim that Darwinism should be rejected because Darwin was a racist is an example of poor logic and poor evidence. I think that when you read Darwin's "The Descent of Man", it's clear that he isn't sure about the theory of superior/inferior races. And to Darwin's credit, he doesn't push it in that work.

But even if Darwin was a "racist", it still doesn't follow that evolution is false (i.e. the genetic fallacy). It just means that Darwin was psychologically bigoted, not that he was absolutely wrong in his empirical evaluation.

And even if Hank was right about the connection between evolution and racism, the only thing that can be concluded is that there is a connection between them, and not whether any empirical evidence falsifies the theory.

And so, Hank wrongly applies an ethical test to debunk a scientific theory. After all, "racism" may or may not be right. But in either case, it's a category mistake in relation to the question of whether the evidence is favorable to Darwinian evolution.

note: I'm not defending racism here. I'm merely assessing the logic of his argument.



lightshineon -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/15/2008 11:21:06 PM)

I like Hank.



FurGodWurLivin -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/16/2008 3:16:23 AM)

I had tried to steer clear of this thread, but what can I say.... I'm a glutton for punishment.

I am not a fan of Hank Hanegraaf. First, take everything the man says regarding spiritual gifts with a grain of salt. From what I have seen and heard of him, Hanegraaf feels a need to prove the Charismatic movement heretical (which it was not) and that viewpoint taints just about everything else he says. Much as some have studied the movements they strongly disagree with (be it WoF, Latter Rain, or whatever), and then everything they have a negative view of gets dragged into the catagory of that particular movement. Every single author and theologian (save the biblical authors) have blatant biases in their writing and studying. The Maccabean Thesis came about because Porphyry believed that prophesy could not be declarative of future events, so Daniel must have been a contemporary account of events due to it's accuracy.

Secondly, I have seen the man fail in his research on a number of occasions. Quotes taken out of context, made up statistics, and a lack of understanding regarding his subject can stick out like a sore thumb.

Lastly, I do not see much humiliy in his ministry. If you set yourself up as a Biblical authority by taking on a name such as "The Bible Answer Man", you are asking for controversy. I pray that God will open his eyes to just how much damage he does to fellow Christians by unloading his ideas and passing them off as God-inspired... just as I pray that He does so with the rest of us.

Adam
PS, "watchdog" ministries really earn my ire in a hurry because they don't go through the actual process of Biblical discipline, and many times the stuff they are adressing ISN'T WORTH FIGHTING ABOUT. Especially when the "biblical discipline" model is supposed to be used in the context of sin in a church. To those who would argue the "biblical merits" of a "ministry" such as Hanegraaf's, I would suggest that proof-texting verses out of context is rather poor form.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/16/2008 7:22:57 AM)

FurGodWurLivin said
quote:

First, take everything the man says regarding spiritual gifts with a grain of salt. From what I have seen and heard of him, Hanegraaf feels a need to prove the Charismatic movement heretical (which it was not) and that viewpoint taints just about everything else he says. Much as some have studied the movements they strongly disagree with (be it WoF, Latter Rain, or whatever), and then everything they have a negative view of gets dragged into the catagory of that particular movement.


First of all you're flat out wrong, unless he has changed his view in the last few years, he considers the Charistmatic movement as a whole an "in house debate." Those were his words. Second, his mentor Walter Martin, believed in speaking in tongues but did not practice it.
quote:

Secondly, I have seen the man fail in his research on a number of occasions. Quotes taken out of context, made up statistics, and a lack of understanding regarding his subject can stick out like a sore thumb.

Quotes "out of context" is a typical dodge by those who have been exposed by his ministry. I'd have to see it before I believe it. Generally, those who claim that cannot present any improved context.

"Made up statistic" is quite a charge, the equivalent to lying. Do you actually have some statistics that he made up along with documentation? Or is this just slander on your part?
quote:

Lastly, I do not see much humiliy in his ministry. If you set yourself up as a Biblical authority by taking on a name such as "The Bible Answer Man", you are asking for controversy.


He didn't create that tag. It was the name of a radio Q & A of Walter Martin before Hank was ever known publically in any way. And you're building a mountain out of a molehill by judging a man's motives by the title of a radio show.

quote:

I pray that God will open his eyes to just how much damage he does to fellow Christians by unloading his ideas and passing them off as God-inspired... just as I pray that He does so with the rest of us.


He doesn't claim "God-inspired" for his ideas. That is slander on your part.

Me-thinks you have a whole lot of accusation with little substance.
quote:

Adam
PS, "watchdog" ministries really earn my ire in a hurry because they don't go through the actual process of Biblical discipline, and many times the stuff they are addressing ISN'T WORTH FIGHTING ABOUT. ....


And you know this---how? According to many of those "watchdog" ministries, the practice of church discipline goes on behind the scenes.



lightshineon -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/16/2008 4:11:48 PM)

Well I am a Chrismatic, and find nothing wrong with his teachings.



kmangel -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/18/2008 5:22:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lightshineon

I like Hank.


I do, too. He was one of the first Bible teachers I listened to as a new believer. I had never turned to a Christian radio station in the then 43 years of my life when I became a new believer and Hank's was one of the first, if not the first, Christian program I "discovered". I'm concluding I didn't just discover Hank, either. God guided me to him. One of my very first prayers to God as a new Christian was to learn about God and Jesus and one of God's first responses was have me listen to Hank Hanegraaf.



cognitivemagic -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/18/2008 8:43:29 PM)

Both Hank Hannegraff and Walter Martin are "charismatic", in the sense that they believe that "spiritual gifts" are a present reality.

However, neither are committed to the kind of "charismania" that's exemplified by TBN and the kit and kaboodle of the Prosperity movement.

Both Hank and Walter are "moderate" in their understanding of the exercise of "spiritual gifts".

TBN and the Prosperity movement take a "magical" understanding of these "gifts", within the context of the general "faith movement" doctrine, that is at odds with CRI's past and current president's; as well as the historic Christian Church.

In fact, Walter Martin's overt rejection of the "Faith movement" had barred him from appearing on "Praise the Lord" and other platforms on TBN.

Therefore, it's a wrong "guilt by association" argument to lop Hank and Walter in with the charismaniacs.



colliefan -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/19/2008 2:27:09 PM)

quote:

Both Hank Hannegraff and Walter Martin are "charismatic", in the sense that they believe that "spiritual gifts" are a present reality.


All Christians are charismatic in that they are grace-gifted. The problem comes when the term charismatic is equated wth emotionalism. And the emotionalism drives their doctrine rather than the Word driving their doctrine/emotions.



bride48 -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/19/2008 4:47:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: colliefan

quote:

Both Hank Hannegraff and Walter Martin are "charismatic", in the sense that they believe that "spiritual gifts" are a present reality.


All Christians are charismatic in that they are grace-gifted. The problem comes when the term charismatic is equated wth emotionalism. And the emotionalism drives their doctrine rather than the Word driving their doctrine/emotions.


What an excellent way of putting it!



cybrjewls -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/20/2008 12:28:58 AM)

Hello! Here is the source: If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen.

The least in the Kingdom of God is greater than John the Baptist. Therefore, every word Hank says is accountable in public format as everyone elses is; publicly or privately. We are held to the same law as the prophets were. Jesus said that men will have to give account for every word spoken on the Day of Judgment. If Hank is in The Kingdom of God, and not the kingdom of apostasy, then he is held to this same standard if what he says does not come to pass regarding his faith. For by your words you will be judged or aquitted.

'light of Scripture. '


quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

Has any source been posted yet about what prophetic claims Hank said? Just wondering.



lw9 -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/20/2008 12:46:20 AM)

quote:

prophetica: Therefore, every word Hank says is accountable in public format as everyone elses is; publicly or privately. We are held to the same law as the prophets were.


When did Hanegraff say "The Lord told me..." and claim to be speaking words directly from God as a prophet.

Post the sources from Hanegraff. Thanks.



cybrjewls -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/20/2008 1:40:35 AM)

Hank makes statements concerning God all the time on the air. God Reigns supreme in the Kingdom of Heaven above. How come you think that Hank does not believe the Scripture when Scripture teaches that if anyone speaks they should speak this way?

quote:

ORIGINAL: lw9

quote:

prophetica: Therefore, every word Hank says is accountable in public format as everyone elses is; publicly or privately. We are held to the same law as the prophets were.


When did Hanegraff say "The Lord told me..." and claim to be speaking words directly from God as a prophet.

Post the sources from Hanegraff. Thanks.



themaestro -> RE: Hank Hanegraaf of The Christian Research Institute. (4/20/2008 10:07:26 AM)

We have a friend at church who is a former CRI employee. He tells of mass exoduses of staff because of Hank's ideas. Hank lives in a luxurious gated community while criticizing others for the same behavior. His complete embrace of orthodox liturgy and Catholicism have driven other staffers away. His ego and arrogance at CRI have driven many others away too. My friend also said there were allegations of financial mismanagement but no proof has been offered yet, just allegations



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI