Sorry, you want to know what I think about Bishop T D Jakes???
1- He's not God and is subject to error. He ERRORED when he suggested that Ruth & Naomi were borderline Lesbians, and that Jonathan and David were nearly homosexual men. Both were egregious misrepresentations of scripture, but I have heard equally as bad representations from many of his critics...
2- In my opinion Bishop has diminished his mission of being a Gospel Preacher in favor of business and liberally centered social justice and the pursuit of dynamic innovative theory. (I write on this in my upcoming book, so stay tuned)
4- Some say he's a gay, pedophile. I DO NOT agree and find no proof or evidence of such. This reminds me of mean spirited evil, and the nature of such an allegation should not be taken lightly and is disturbing considering the lack of effort to display truth, however...I digress...
5- Some will say because he has Oneness roots he has a doctrinal problem...I say his doctrinal problem is no more than John MacArthur's Calvinist, cessationist view and those that follow such false teachings...they are all one in the same and different or varying degrees of error. Yes, I believe cessationism is a DOCTRINE OF DEVILS too!, yet I hear almost noone talking about that at all or doing conferences on the subject, although that would be very easy to do with such false narratives from such allegedly astute individuals..
6- I don't give any credibility to anyone of the world who wants to bring judgement upon someone in the church. They may be correct, but I believe anyone sincere will show their face and not hide behind internet anonymity especially in an age where people take and display videos of rocks, trees and themselves so easily...
With all that said, he may be guilty, and his excuse that if he were guilty all he would have to do is repent, is a fictitious sham...and we can talk about that in the comments, is over the top and many say, telling.
Ultimately, time and GOD will tell...but there is no GOSSIP about it here, and if you want to know the FACTS written about Bishop T D Jakes on this blog over the years, start HERE otherwise, this is not a "tell all" blog and I DO NOT engage in gossip just to be talking and I am not looking for inside information nor trying to create a narrative from someone close to events...PLEASE...I don't have the time or attention...
Blessed!
A critic responded by saying that my point #1 disqualified the complete article due to the fact that I state that Jakes position was a ERROR and not HERESY...First, I would say that error and heresy are two different things. As people we often ERROR in scripture, but errors do not, in and of themselves, necessarily lead to heresy. To be clear, this is Jakes initial and real statement on the issue:
ReplyDelete“Ruth turns to Naomi and says “I shall not leave thee.” She makes her statement to this woman…that sounds somewhat, somewhere in between poetry, intimacy, and borders on lesbianism. People don’t even know how to explain what Ruth said to Naomi. It makes them uncomfortable. They’re afraid to talk about it. They don’t want to teach on it. Same thing with David and Jonathan…where there were same-sex relationships getting too close, people don’t even know what to say.” ~ [Bishop T.D. Jakes, "Nothing Just Happens" 2001 Woman Thou Art Loosed Conference]
In fairness, Jakes at no point said that Ruth and Naomi were lesbian, nor Jonathan and David homosexual even though he suggests that the scripture said that both, in each relationship, were described as more than Mother/Daughter In Law and brothers or friends. However, Jakes at no point that I am aware of used his understanding of these relationships to either teach and or endorse homosexuality.
Now, David may be somewhat of an anomaly because he was so defiled as to commit adultery and murder in one fell swoop, the facts remain that we know that the Bible neither teaches, endorses or approves of homosexual relationships. Jakes "suggestion" is tantamount to ERROR.
Whereas a heresy actually moves and changes the standards. If Jakes had taught that because of his understanding that God allows some relationships among men and woman to cross those thresholds, NOW we're dealing with heresy.
In short, EVERY heresy has error or begins with error. Every error, DOES NOT necessarily end with heresy. Errors can be corrected, whereas HERESIES are most often always fully encapsulated errors that change whole doctrines such as the doctrine of hell or the deity of Christ.
Hope that helps so you can move on to 2
Another criticism I have received is that my article seems to hold out that the accuser is wrong and that until there is satisfactory evidence, that Jakes is right and or at least innocent.
ReplyDeleteNow, this is important. However, anyone that has followed me for any length of time, or that has read my position on clergy sexual sins and abuse, knows that this is not an area I equivocate on at all.
In THIS case, as I understand it, NO form of abuse (except self abuse) was alleged. Jakes is not being accused of molesting, raping or using anyone for sexual sins. He is being accused of displaying an ungodly mode of behavior at secular parties and gatherings. He is being accused, not by a victim, because there was no victimization, but by a party attendee or participant...
My question is why and how does anyone place so much credibility in the words or a person, who was at the party(ies) doing or at least expecting the same things that Jakes is being accused of? Once again, the accuser is not a victim, neither do they say that anyone is being victimized...Now, IF guilty, the alleged behavior is inexcusable, but given the nature of the world, where tick-tock videos are the life's blood of many and TMZ is always open and on the prowl...how does a man of Jakes stature do all the things that he is accused of without ONE video of any of it, when nobody has said that cell phones were turned in or restricted?
THIS is why I find little credibility in the statement. This is not like abuse at all and should not be treated like or examined as if it were.
Now, GOSSIP makes all these things one in the same. Anyone saying anything against a preacher should be believed. I don't think so because I know and have seen just how nasty, unkind, and unfeeling people can be towards folk who have neither done them nor anyone else wrong or harm. Don't believe me? Ask JESUS!