Joyce Meyer True or False Teacher?

[Fidei Defensor]

This is to continue a conversation on Joyce Meyer.
 

Claims against her as a false teacher are:

1) She claims Jesus is no longer The Son of God (heresy)

2)  She says she isn’t a Sinner 

On the 1) I found only a sound bites of her with a still photo on youtube. Anyone can splice words together from what she had said with movie making programs. 
 

2) Could be semantics, she says she isn’t a sinner. The context could be, we are “A New Creation” in Christ, baptized in his death and ao are not sinners anymore but “Kings and Priests.” (Revelation 1:5-6). 
If she says she doesn’t sin, then that falls under, “if we say we have not sinned, we call God a liar.” (1 John 1:10)
 

If either of these or more can be verified, then yes its heresy and must be addressed. 
 

The biggest problem is all the sound bites are grainy and doesn’t sound like her voice pitch. I’d be more convinced if there was video footage of one of her sermons. 

Everyone knows you can easily doctor audio. Video or a published book is harder. 
 

 

 

 

Edited July 17, 2022 by Fidei Defensor

[Fidei Defensor]

We should confront unsound doctrine, heresies, and false teachers, but we must have concrete proof of error, and not slander or defame. We must take care like a detective solving a crime, and make sure we gather “hard” evidence if there is any. 
 

That is my chief concern, that sound doctrine prevail, but that no one is needlessly demonized for something you cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt they believe.  
 

If its published in their book or in a video, that is more concrete than sound clips that can be edited from multiple sermons to make sentences:

See the movie Sneakers, “My voice is my password,” where Marty (Robert Redford) and his team have to piece together words a bald man says to create his sentence key code. 

[Fidei Defensor]

Here is Joyce on Jesus:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oh1Y0Xvs2Zs

Nothing about 1) claim {Jesus stopped being Son of God} is here. She is espousing Scripture. She even quotes John 3:16 “For God So Loved The World, that He gave His Only Begotten Son..” She quotes Jesus is the Son of God refuting the 1) claim. 

Video also refutes claim 2) {That Joyce said she isn’t a sinner} She says we continue to sin at 5:20-5:28/ 15:18 in the video above. 
 

So both 1) and 2) claims  are false according to what she says here on her video. 
 

TAG: @Omegaman 3.0@missmuffet

 

 

 

Edited July 17, 2022 by Fidei Defensor

[Fidei Defensor]

2 minutes ago, Rosie1jack2pauline3 said:

Claims that she is a great teacher, needs to be backed up with scripture also.

members are allowed to voice an opinion on what she preaches, especially if there is no scripture to back up what she says/ preaches.

I am very careful who I listen to, and what I do read, I make sure it’s backed up with scripture....

That is wise. 
 

But Joyce has been slandered. People said she says “Jesus Stopped Being The Son of God,” and that “she says isn’t a sinner.” She says the opposite in the video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oh1Y0Xvs2Zs

She calls Jesus the Son in John 3:16 and says we still sin. 

 

[Fidei Defensor]

4 minutes ago, Rosie1jack2pauline3 said:

I must admit, I have listened to her and enjoyed it, she is so “ Alive” in Christ, imo...she was on fire for the Lord every time I have listened to her.

Same here. I have never seen her say these things people claim are heresies she said. I have watched many of her sermons, interviews, conferences, and etc and never heard her say anything unscriptural. 
 

I believe people accusing her on youtube and on websites are envious of her success (James 3:14-16), and others don’t like she is woman that teaches, and so they seek to harm her reputation and defame her. 

[Ray12614]

1 hour ago, Fidei Defensor said:

That is wise. 
 

But Joyce has been slandered. People said she says “Jesus Stopped Being The Son of God,” and that “she says isn’t a sinner.” She says the opposite in the video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oh1Y0Xvs2Zs

She calls Jesus the Son in John 3:16 and says we still sin. 

 

That is usually the case regarding this type of thing. People do not like those who don't agree 100% with all their 'pet doctrines' and instead of taking their concerns to the Lord for His decision, they feel that they have to take matters into their own hands.

Frankly, we should investigate these things, but, also be aware, accusations and slander are traits much like the 'accuser of the brethren'. It is a very slippery slope, and Jesus has little patience for it . . . . unless they repent of it, they will have to answer for it at Jesus' Bema Seat.

Ray . . . 

 

[Omegaman 3.0]

Good luck with the thread, I hope it is fruitful!

[AnOrangeCat]

2 hours ago, Rosie1jack2pauline3 said:

Claims that she is a great teacher, needs to be backed up with scripture also.

I'm in agreement with this. To be honest I tend to avoid televangelists like the plague, though. Part of it is because written format is a lot easier for me to digest and sit through in comparison to listening to a speaker, but it's also always so disheartening to get attached to a given popular teacher only for a scandal to come out. All the money, popularity, and influence they get makes for an environment with a lot of temptation, then on top of that there's a lot of criticism (deserved or not) and inevitably people who just want to smear them for whatever reason. It's sad.

[Starise]

Lines have been drawn here and I feel this post was made to prove someone's opinion instead of examining the data in an objective way.

I suggest we keep a few things in mind. Look at the person's LIFE  and LIFESTYLE as part of the things you take into account.

Don't let your love for a speaker blind you to the truth. 

Thirdly apostates fool a lot of people because they are good at what they do.They frequently mix a lot of truth with little lies.

Look at who they endorse,support and keep company with because these things all point to what they really are.

 

[GandalfTheWise]

 

2 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

We should confront unsound doctrine, heresies, and false teachers, but we must have concrete proof of error, and not slander or defame. We must take care like a detective solving a crime, and make sure we gather “hard” evidence if there is any. That is my chief concern, that sound doctrine prevail, but that no one is needlessly demonized for something you cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt they believe.  If its published in their book or in a video, that is more concrete than sound clips that can be edited from multiple sermons to make sentences:

[Edited w/reformating & partial quote for reducing space on the page]

I fully agree.  I've been watching heresy hunters (as I think of them) flourish in some circles for decades.  It's a seductive thing and I spent a few years as a zealous heresy hunter myself.  You start off with sincere motives but it eventually turns into a dark obsession with finding false teaching in every ambiguous statement a person makes, especially if they are outside of your denomination or theological opinions.  At some point, you start looking at individual words and wondering what do they "really" mean when they say this and assume the worst.  It's ultimately a prideful trap where you think you are among the spiritual elite discerning enough to see false teaching that most others are missing.  And you see yourself as doing an indispensable service to the church.

What got me out of it was looking into original sources for myself.  There was a particular popular author and book (not named here) that had started me down this path of heresy hunting in the early 80's.  I didn't question what he said since the book was heavily researched and well-documented, and thought God had lead me across a critical situation in the church that everyone should be concerned about and do something about.  I didn't question a thing in the book for months until someone in a Sunday school class handed me a booklet written by a person I'd labeled as a false teacher on the basis of that book.  I enthusiastically tore into it to verify the accusations and to maybe find more.  Instead, I found that my go-to book and author  was full of cherry-picked, out of context,  and misrepresented material.  In the very first case I looked at, the original author had written a paragraph and in the next two paragraphs expanded on what he did and did not mean.  My go-to book ignored and did not quote this writer's paragraph on what he did not mean and made the claim that that was indeed what he really meant.  In other words, my trusted heresy hunter was putting the wrong words into the original author's mouth and accused him of teaching something he explicitly said was wrong.  I was shocked at this outright lie and assumed it was an oversight.  But then I found similar "oversights" in a few other cases I looked at.  I realized that this was indeed the modus operandi of this heresy hunting author.  He had reached a point where he was putting words into people's mouths about what they really were and were not intending to say.  Over the years, I've seen that same pattern in many heresy hunters.  There is simply the sincere belief that any ambiguous phrase is assumed to be hiding someone's actual beliefs and that it is okay to pull things out of context because they have something to hide.  

Awhile ago, I spent a fair amount of effort on this site trying to fact check the most egregious examples I was seeing (which in my mind were probably pushing being slander or libel and definitely at a level of falsely accusing the brethren), but ultimately it's tiring and exhausting, and a never ending task that takes away time from other things.  Unfortunately, the couple of seconds it takes to copy and paste or link to a false accusation often overwhelms the amount of time it takes to meaningfully research and address it.  This is especially true with elaborate and extensive accusations that pile together 101 Reasons so-and-so is a heretic where the sheer weight of "evidence" takes on a life of its own where showing the first 10 of the list of 101 reasons are wrong does not disprove the other 91 in some people's minds.