I was at Yankee Stadium and enjoyed myself emensely.

This is the fourth time I have seen Joel Osteen in NYC.

The reason why they charge a nominal amount for tickets is to keep order. If people could just walk in there would be a mob scene. They explained that at one of the events – not this one – I do not think.

I do NOT consider myself to be highly religious, spiritual yes, but NOT religious. And yes… I did give. I felt it in my heart to do so. Was not a lot, but it was something. I enjoy Joel's positive message. It's better than the doom and gloom we live with 24/7.

I am Jewish and to be honest I would not be confortable with a highly religous Christian service. This is not a crime. Joel ministers to everyone. That is not a crime either.

Sounds to me like you have an axe<sp> to grind!

Roz Fruchtman
http://www.SayItWithEcards.com

No matter how well this is done, there will be criticism. If we feed the poor our motives will be attacked “only interested in getting people saved in the hood” or created “rice bowl Christians”.

The key is God working in each part of the process.

I've worked with them all and have had positive and negative experiences with each for various reasons. But I'm not going to broad brush a whole movement and its members because of one or even a few experiences.

Your observation reminds me of the story of how a good friend of mine came to Christ. I (and others) had witnessed to her on several occasions, but what brought her to Christ wasn't the thought of eternity in Hell. Rather, she responded to the Bible's message concerning the “least of these” which she found in both the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Some are turned off by the Old Testament because of the violence, but she was drawn in by it because of the mercy she found there.

Anyway, my point is about the doctrine of sin — what you referred to as the “cross.” A lot of people we would consider “conservative” focus either on personal piety, as I mentioned earlier; or moral purity (primarily sexual) without considering issues like racism, economics and the like which God also identifies as sin (but we don't often read those passages). You see, it's really easy to condemn the sins that the other guy is committing without checking the whole of Scripture to find out where you fall short.

I've attended many dispensationally minded churches and know many dispensationaly minded pastors (100's) and have never seem a church or met a pastor that fits your often stated profile. I think you are trying to make a person view into a universal truth. BTW, don't you go to a Dispie church yourself (CMA)?

Squeaky glad you stated this . I know many of us realize how important giving to the poor is in regards to our Faith . Have been reading much scripture as of late and in a good Bible Study . I am seeing how highly important in the Old testament it was to support the poor and those without . . The prophets spoke to it often, and God judged Isreal on how they treated the least of us .

In my youth i went to a respectfull and popular Episcopal church . Never heard salavation or relationship with Christ preached on a personal level. The church did much good for the local community, and I speak highly normaly of the last impression I received there of the holiness of God . Social Justice without the Cross is just as ineeficient as the Cross without any concern of the least of us and those in need.

Also, the more dispensationally-minded churches tended to dismiss social action altogether unless there was a direct link to evangelism because, in that view, getting people “saved” was the primary purpose of the church. Now, these folks had the “cross,” so to speak, but only in a personally pietistic way, which was different from the properly holistic Gospel that (thank God) is being preached more and more today in evangelical churches.

Some conservative groups did over react to the “social gospels” false gospel by minimizing social concern ministries that predated the social gospel. They threw there own babies out with the dirty social gospel bath water. But many continued to serve the poor, but purposely did so quietly to avoid being associated with the “social gospel”.

In fact, historically that's just what “fundamentalism” was about during the split in the 1920s. What the “fundies” missed then was that the concern for social issues in the rest of the church grew out of their understanding of the Gospel, specifically James' comment that “faith without works is dead.” Had both sides understood that there would have been no breakup.

Any “gospel” without the cross is not the gospel. It seems we agree on this point. I attended meeting of Emergents. Their emphasis was the moral teachings of Jesus, specifically the Sermon on the Mount. Absent from their teaching was the cross. I believe even the moral teachings of Jesus without the cross is a false gospel. I'm not saying this is a reflection of every emergent.
I'm a Pentecostal, emphasizing the gifts and fruit of the Holy Spirit without the cross is also false gospel.