Joyce Meyer True or False Teacher?

[ayin jade]

Here is one quote of hers, with citation from a book of hers. I cannot find that book locally, or online, so I cant check to verify or dispute this claim, nor do I know if she recanted this later. 

Quote

“His spirit went to hell because that is where we deserve to go… There is no hope of anyone going to heaven unless they believe this truth.” (The most important decision you’ll ever make, by Joyce Meyer, second printing, May 1993, page 37)

Anyone able to check this out?

[Fidei Defensor]

1 hour ago, Marathoner said:

How often do some abandon merciful judgment, forgetting the mercy of God toward us all, casting shrill accusations upon their fellows? If anyone here can make the claim to be free of error, then let them be judged accordingly. 

Any spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God. That is the teaching of the apostle. Furthermore, mercy triumphs over judgment (James 2:13); judge not, lest you be judged (Luke 6:37). Knowing these things, we should beware that we aren't found to be an unrighteous judge before the sight of the Lord. The measure by which we judge shall be returned to us. 

As the Lord said to those accusers of the adulterous woman, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. The only one present without sin neither accused her not cast a stone. He forgave her instead. We are to be like Him.  

So Worthy! Amen and Amen! 
 

“Matthew 7:1-5

Judging Others

[1] “Judge not, that you be not judged. [2] For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. [3] Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? [4] Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? [5] You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” 

 

[Fidei Defensor]

34 minutes ago, ayin jade said:

Here is one quote of hers, with citation from a book of hers. I cannot find that book locally, or online, so I cant check to verify or dispute this claim, nor do I know if she recanted this later. 

Anyone able to check this out?

Yeah that one I can’t find any direct source to, its a quote of some book she allegedly wrote. 
 

I want to share something I learned, Nestorius was credited as founding a heretical group that believed there are two christs, one flesh and evil, one spirit and good. When Nestorius was tried for heresy, they found he had been trying to simply explain the two natures of Christ as both God and Man (Romans 1:1-5) to people, and they in their misunderstanding founded a cult (Nestorianism) using his name. Sadly even though Nestorius was cleared of saying heresy, the damage was done, people associate the heresy with him because people misunderstanding what he taught created a doctrine out of it. His name is Mud now. That is a concern I also have for people, if they are accused, it can stick even after they are cleared. 

Edited July 17, 2022 by Fidei Defensor

[ayin jade]

She did write the book but I cant find it locally to see if she did write that. So the book is real.

[Fidei Defensor]

2 minutes ago, ayin jade said:

She did write the book but I cant find it locally to see if she did write that. So the book is real.

What is book’s name? I may be able to find it. 

I haven’t been able to get the book’s name. 

[MissTury]

2 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Uh I posted the claims people made about her, and then shared her own video that debunked two of those claims. 

I have a simple question. How are we to know that you have fairly represented the claims and not misrepresented them? Shouldn't the same standard apply to you that you want from others? Maybe your assertions are inaccurate or taken out of context. Were these claims made in these forums?

[believeinHim]

10 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

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

 

 

 

Yes, Doctoring a real, Paper back or hard cover book is hard to do. I think it is pretty much why they are trying to be destroyed. Thanks for bringing this one to light, Fidei Defensor ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

[believeinHim]

10 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

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

 

 

 

I wasn't aware doctoring audit is easier to do than doctoring video. This could be why while watching a video, It feels as if so much more of the senses are being stimulated. Reading a paper book feels less. Thanks again, @Fidei Defensor! ! ! ! !

[GandalfTheWise]

FWIW, here's how I look at such accusations and go about trying to see if they hold water or not.  I like to go back to original sources and see what people actually said for themselves and give them the same benefit of the doubt I'd give to anyone.

I just skimmed through Joyce Meyer's "The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make" 10th edition from about 1996.  It's literally the first time I've ever read or listened to anything she's done to any extent other than a few quotes or sound bytes.  It seemed like a pretty standard presentation of the gospel in vernacular terms so people who know little about Christianity would understand.  The worst I could find were things that were a bit sloppy.  It's pretty much what I'd expect from any typical preacher or teacher who's been around pentecostal circles.  Nothing jumped out at me as particularly problematic though those who see charismatics and pentecostals as heretics would likely dislike some parts of the book for that reason.

Given that this book is one often referenced as proof of her heresy of teaching another Jesus, I thought I'd be seeing a different Jesus featured prominently.  I found nothing of the sort.  Here are some quotes that are representative of what is in the book. 

These are from chapter 3 that is talking about who Jesus is as part of an ongoing paraphrase of what happened from Adam and Eve through the Israelites to the church age.

...God began to deal with them [Adam and Eve] concerning their sin, but He also had an immediate plan for their redemption and deliverance from this mess they had gotten themselves into. In Genesis 3:15, God told the serpent that the offspring (seed of woman) would bruise his head, and he (Satan) would bruise the heel of the offspring. He was speaking of Jesus, His only begotten Son, who was already in existence spiritually. God is a Triune God. We refer to Him as "The Trinity": one God in three persons—Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Each one of the Holy Persons of the Godhead has a major role in your life. (p. 25)

...Jesus already existed spiritually, but in order to help man out of the mess he was in, Jesus would eventually need to come to earth. He would need to get inside a natural human body like yours and mine. He would need to humble and lower Himself to become a human being. Remember, Jesus is all God, the Son of God. In other words, very God of very God. He certainly was and is very much God.  [p. 26]

...This Messiah would become their sacrifice, the final sacrifice, a perfect sacrifice. He would be the sacrificial, perfect, flawless lamb of God. No longer would they need to offer lambs without blemish on the altars in the temple as a sacrifice for their sin. Jesus would come and be the last sacrifice, the final sacrifice. His sacrifice would put an end to the system of the law. [p. 32]

...The prophecies were being given. People were waiting for their Messiah, their Savior, and Deliverer. I do not believe they even truly understood what they were waiting for. They did not understand He would deliver them from the law, from the "works" involved in trying to please God with perfection when it is impossible to do. They did not understand that He, Jesus, the Messiah, Savior of the world, would shed His own blood on a cross, let His blood flow, pouring out His life to remove all sin from every generation. 3 They were waiting, but did not really know what they were waiting for. [p. 33]

..God's time came. The Holy Spirit appeared to a young virgin named Mary. She became pregnant by the miracle-working power of God—pregnant with Jesus, the Son of God. It had to happen this way. Jesus was already in heaven spiritually and had always been. He was with God from the beginning. But now He was going to take on flesh so He could help the rest of the fleshly humans who were in a mess that they had no way out of without a Savior. John 1:1,14 says that Jesus is the Word of God and that the Word of God became flesh and dwelt among men. Hebrews 4:15 says Jesus is a High Priest who understands our weaknesses and failures because He. having had a fleshly body and a natural soul, was tempted in all points just like we are, yet without sin. Beloved, this is the big difference. Jesus was alive to God inside, totally connected with the Father. He was one with Him, like Adam was before he sinned. The Bible calls Him the second Adam. (See 1 Cor. 15:45,47.) Romans 5:12-21 says if one man's (Adam) sin caused all men to sin, then how much more can one man's (Jesus) righteousness make all men right with God? [pp. 34-35]

On pages 35-36, there is one sloppily phrased section that I'm not sure what she was getting at.  I suspect she was referring to Jesus sharing our common humanity but having a pure relationship with God as Adam and Eve once had but phrased it rather poorly.

...Adam's sin came down on you from generation to generation. Now, if you will believe it, the second Adam, Jesus, is waiting to give you His righteousness. Adam was a man, full of God, full of God's life. Sin came and man was filled with darkness. The light in him went out. Are you full of darkness or light? Jesus was also a man, born of a woman, but He was full of God. Adam sinned. Jesus did not ever sin; He was a perfect sacrifice for sin. [pp 35-36].

From the beginning of chapter 4 (What should you believe?) pages 37-41,

Believe that Jesus did what the Bible says. Believe He is indeed the Son of God, born of a virgin. He took man's sin on Himself. He became our sacrifice and died on the cross. He did not stay dead. He was in the grave three days. During that time, He entered hell and defeated Satan. All this He did willingly because He loved His Father (God) and because God and Jesus loved you and me so much that no plan was too extreme. Whatever it took to get God's people back, free again, is what They would do. Jesus paid for our sins on the cross and went to hell in our place. Then, as God had promised, on the third day Jesus rose from the dead. What Happened on the Cross When Jesus hung on the cross, He took our sin upon Himself. God cannot stay in the presence of sin. As Jesus took our sin, He was separated from the presence of the Father. The same thing happened to Adam in the garden. As he sinned, the presence of God left him. God cannot dwell in the midst of sin. Sin puts a wall between man and God. Jesus was taking your sins and those of everyone else upon Him as He felt this absence of His Father's presence. He said, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (See Matt. 27:46, author's paraphrase). Jesus knew it would happen, but the horror of separation from the bright presence of the Father was worse than He could have imagined, and it caused Him to cry out. He committed His Spirit to the Father and died. So they put Him—that is, His body—in a grave, and His spirit went to hell because that is where we deserved to go. Remember in the very beginning of this book, I said that when you die, only your body dies. The rest of you, your soul and spirit, goes either to heaven or hell. There is no hope of anyone going to heaven unless they believe this truth. You cannot go to heaven unless you believe with all your heart that Jesus took your place. He became your substitute and took all the punishment you deserve. He bore all your sins. He paid the debt you owe. He did it for you because He loves you. John 3:16 says: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Jesus went to hell for you. He died for you. He paid for your sins. God was faithful to Jesus. God did what He told Jesus He would do. He raised Him from the dead. But until that happened, He was alone for three days satisfying the courts of justice and conquering the hosts of hell. He took the keys of hell and death. He preached to the prisoners held captive there in paradise. He led them out victorious. On the third day, He rose from the dead. After that, He entered into the heavenlies with some of His own blood and placed it there as a constant reminder that sinless blood had been shed to pay  for man's sin because the life is in the blood. (Lev. 17:11.)

Now, I'd say that this latter part gets a bit sloppy with regard to the nuances between the grave, hell, where souls are before the final judgement, legal and spiritual aspects of judgement, mercy, and forgiveness, and includes conjectures on what various isolated verses mean, but no sloppier than I've often heard from many pastors and teachers over the years in a range of churches and ministries and read in various posts over the years from a range of Christians.  Later in the book, she refers to necessary beliefs following a format pretty similar to most Christian creeds I've seen.  She includes clearly Trinitarian statements as part of that.

And then another accusation of heresy is the isolated sound bite (without context of what was said next) where she says Jesus became sin and was no longer the Son of God referring to a point in time when He was heading to and was on the cross.   If she kept going on for a couple minutes making claims that Jesus was no longer God for a time or things like that to make a strong point out of it, I'd see that as very problematic and would call it out as such.  However, I suspect this is more likely a very sloppy cringe-worthy way of saying that Jesus' relationship with His Father was somehow broken at that time because he was bearing our sin and included a poor paraphrase of the first part of II Cor 5:21 (For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. KJV).  

Bottom line, in this one book/booklet that is referenced as proof of heresy and false teaching, I didn't see any serious problems except for some sloppiness and conjectures about the spirit world before the Judgement Day that I've heard in many Christian circles.  There was a definite pentecostal/charismatic aspect to it that I have no doubt affects some people's view toward it.  

I've not seen her alleged prosperity and word of faith type teachings as to whether they are nuts (name it and claim it) or nuanced (where a necessary part of faith is God's guidance in what we ask for) so cannot comment on that.  

My sense from reading this material for myself is that many republishing and repeating some of these accusations are not looking into this for themselves but simply repeating what someone else said and passing it on as something to be accepted as true.

In this day and age where unproven accusations flying through social media are enough to cancel someone and ruin their life, Christians need to be different.  We need to be committed to truth and that can require effort.  It's easy to trivially republish or repost things that appall us, but that's the lazy thing to do, and at some point we will become part of the screaming accusatory wild mob rather than the respected voice of reason that is trusted to discern things clearly.  I think God is calling us all to be more like the Bereans who looked for themselves as to what was true, or Gamaliel who gave the benefit of the doubt, or to follow Deut 13:14 ("then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly...") rather than believing hearsay of people who are just repeating what they heard.

FWIW, the biggest consequence in my eyes is that when I see Christians pass on unproven accusations in blogs or posts or videos is that I lose confidence in what those individuals say going forward when it regards such things.  I don't doubt their sincerity or motives, but they just showed me I'm risking my own reputation if I don't double check what they say before I repeat it or act on it.   

 

[GandalfTheWise]

1 hour ago, ayin jade said:

Here is one quote of hers, with citation from a book of hers. I cannot find that book locally, or online, so I cant check to verify or dispute this claim, nor do I know if she recanted this later. 

Anyone able to check this out?

Yup.  I think this needs to be read in its complete context with the portion that is accusatory shown in red.

Pages 39 and 40 (of the version I referenced in a prior post).

Jesus was taking your sins and those of everyone else upon Him as He felt this absence of His Father's presence. He said, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (See Matt. 27:46, author's paraphrase). Jesus knew it would happen, but the horror of separation from the bright presence of the Father was worse than He could have imagined, and it caused Him to cry out. He committed His Spirit to the Father and died. So they put Him—that is, His body—in a grave, and His spirit went to hell because that is where we deserved to go. Remember in the very beginning of this book, I said that when you die, only your body dies. The rest of you, your soul and spirit, goes either to heaven or hell. There is no hope of anyone going to heaven unless they believe this truth. You cannot go to heaven unless you believe with all your heart that Jesus took your place. He became your substitute and took all the punishment you deserve. He bore all your sins. He paid the debt you owe.

If read in context, I'm not sure this is as nefarious as painted to be.  

With regard to the first red line, I've known many believers that rather sloppily use the terms heaven and hell as meaning the same thing both before and after the Judgement day and Resurrection without nuancing what the grave is right now between death and resurrection nor contrasts between the New Earth and heaven.  I've read various conjectures about where Jesus was spiritually and what he was doing between His death and resurrection.  This strikes me as yet another example of sloppiness with regard to such things and stating conjectures as fact.

I think the second red statement flows into the following sentence rather than referring to the sentence two before.  My sense is that the intended use of the second red statement is as a lead in to "There is no hope of anyone going to heaven unless they believe this truth. You cannot go to heaven unless you believe with all your heart that Jesus took your place. He became your substitute and took all the punishment you deserve. He bore all your sins. He paid the debt you owe."  Having seen the previous and following chapters, the emphasis is on salvation through Christ alone.  I think the end of the paragraph explains what she meant by the first red line.

Bottom line though is that to some degree selecting these two lines was putting words into her mouth by forcing a particular bad possible intended meaning onto selectively edited portions of a complete paragraph and ignoring the rest of the paragraph as being superfluous to what she was saying.