Welcome to the online home of Tim Challies, blogger, author and web designer. My first book, "The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment," is now available everywhere.

Read about the blog or about the author.

Monday December 18, 2006

The Rise of Lakewood and Osteen

The Rise of Lakewood Church and Joel OsteenBiography: An account of a person’s life written, composed, or produced by another. Hagiography: A worshipful or idealizing biography. I suppose it is not always easy to determine where biography ends and hagiography begins. But in the case of The Rise of Lakewood Church and Joel Osteen, I am quite certain Richard Young has crossed the line.

Lakewood Church was founded by John and Dodie Osteen on Mother’s Day 1959. A former Southern Baptist pastor, Osteen left the Convention after adopting charismatic beliefs. A leader in the charismatic movement and author of many books, he continued to pastor this church until his death in 1999. Without a successor in place, John’s son Joel decided to try his hand at preaching. And the rest, as they say, is history. Lakewood has risen to become the largest church in America with tens of thousands of people attending services every weekend. The services are broadcast around the world on television and through the Internet to millions more. Osteen’s first book, Your Best Life Now became a New York Times bestseller selling millions of copies. Joel Osteen, the smiling pastor, has become one of the most recognized and recognizable faces of Christianity.

The Rise of Lakewood Church and Joel Osteen, as we can deduce from the title, traces both the rise of the church and the subsequent rise of Joel Osteen. Each of these emphases receives roughly half of the book’s 240 pages. And where Young seems to be enthusiastic about John Osteen, he is enraptured with Joel. The author’s bias is never in doubt. He is captivated with Osteen and seems to feel no need to display any objectivity. The book is filled with hyperbole (though, sadly, this may well be unintentional hyperbolism). “Joel Osteen is one of the great marketing geniuses in the history of the Christian world;” Lakewood Church’s opening weekend in the Compaq Center was “one of the greatest weekends in American church history;” “Together, the team at Lakewood is probably the greatest ministerial team in America.” These superlatives grow tiresome and are especially ridiculous when understood in the context of Joel’s ministry. He succeeded his father in 1999, meaning that his ministry has not yet even spanned a decade. His ministry has seemingly only just begun.

Young dedicates a small portion of the book to discussing Osteen’s critics, but he does so in a condescending way and never once interacts with the most important criticisms—those drawn from the Bible. In the introduction to this book he describes a typical Sunday at Lakewood and, when writing about the worship service, says “I couldn’t help but notice a well-dressed, gray-haired gentleman. His arms were folded, his mouth tightly closed, and he seemed to be looking around, passing judgment on all around him.” Later he summarizes Osteen’s critics like this: “Those who criticize Joel are just people who take a different approach to this teaching [that Christianity has a temporal benefit, not merely an eternal one] and don’t approve of those not like them.” Never once does he interact with serious theological concerns except to affirm that Joel believes in a set of basic Christian doctrine but that he chooses to dwell on what is positive rather than what is negative. Much like in Osteen’s ministry, the word “sin” is only mentioned in this book in a negative sense when describing cliched caricatures of evangelicals. Even in discussing Victoria Osteen’s well-publicized tantrum on an airplane he will admit no wrong-doing, only misunderstandings and media that is set against Osteen. In discussing Osteen’s infamous “media miscue” on the Larry King Show, he admits “Joel made a major mistake” but assures us this was not a mistake based on conviction, but on a desire to ensure that neither unbelievers nor critical Christians would be offended.

Also strangely absent from this book is any real assessment of what Osteen offers the wider church, unless it is merely a message that is positive. But many other pastors have shared a sin-free, positive message before Joel. The word “gospel” appears a handful of times but is never explained, never declared. Young does not discuss how Osteen has impacted the church at large and how other pastors and leaders are emulating him. And yet Young considers him the next great Christian leader. He writes “the Lord has raised a man up in each generation to be a leader and impact that generation. There is a straight line from Charles Finney to D.L. Moody to Billy Sunday to Billy Graham. Who will be that man for this generation?” According to Young it will be Osteen.

Young aptly summarizes Osteen in quoting a woman who watches his program on television. “Most preachers you hear make you feel bad about yourself and they talk about the worst part of yourself. Joel Osteen talks about the best part of yourself.” Young writes, “Statements like this show that Joel is becoming a huge force in Christianity who is reaching out to people far beyond the standard Christian market.” He is, indeed, reaching beyond the typical Christian audience, but this book makes it clear that he is reaching with a message that shares only part of the gospel. Osteen shares a message of God’s love, but, because he will not speak of sin, does not share our desperate need for God’s love and forgiveness. His message, like this book, is incomplete, sharing only half of the story.

With Osteen’s meteoric rise to prominence we can be sure that he will be the subject of many biographies. This is the first, but will certainly not be the last. Surely it will not and cannot be the best. While it provides a good deal of interesting information and succeeds in providing an outline of the rise of Lakewood Church and the subsequent rise of Joel Osteen, it does so in a way that is so clearly biased, so one-sided, that it is difficult to take it seriously. It is not a book that is without value, but it is one that should be read with discernment and with a clear understanding that this is as much hagiography as it is biography.

Amazon

Comments (44) »


1. Lane Keister
December 18, 2006
10:42 AM

So my question is this: how can one write a biography of a pastor who doesn’t exist? By that I mean (somewhat tongue in cheek) that he isn’t a pastor.


2. Bibliomaniac
December 18, 2006
11:05 AM

Ministries that are people-centered never last. They are as mortal as the individuals to whom they cater. Only the ministries that are God- and Word-centered leave a legacy that continues through the ages. That’s why we still hear about Spurgeon today, and not his contemporaries.


3. Sam
December 18, 2006
11:24 AM

Tim,
Thanks for the enlightening review.

If only people would write more hagiography of Christ. Then again, why try to do better that His autobiography?

Sam


4. Tim Challies
December 18, 2006
11:33 AM

“Only the ministries that are God- and Word-centered leave a legacy that continues through the ages.”

I don’t know that this is necessarily true. But certainly those who are Word-centered leave a lasting godly legacy. A man like Finney has left an enduring legacy, but not a positive one. I kind of get the feeling that some day a historian and biographer like Iain Murray will be writing about men like Osteen and Warren and suggesting that, while their popularity was short-lived, they impacted the church in negative ways (much like a biography of Finney would read today).


5. Bibliomaniac
December 18, 2006
11:39 AM

Tim, I should amend that to read, “Only the ministries that are God- and Word-centered leave a WORTHY SPIRITUAL legacy that continues through the ages.”

Of course there are those with negative legacies, such as Finney. But we should not look to them as examples upon which to build today’s ministries.


6. bob s
December 18, 2006
12:09 PM

Tim, I assume the “church” is no longer charismatic. Does the book discuss this issue? Thanks.


7. Randy Brandt
December 18, 2006
12:56 PM

Billy Sunday would whip Joel’s behind for ignoring sin in his preaching.


8. Tim Challies
December 18, 2006
12:59 PM

“Tim, I assume the “church” is no longer charismatic. Does the book discuss this issue? Thanks.”

The book doesn’t really discuss just what Lakewood believes, but I think you’d certainly find that it remains fully charismatic. You may not find a lot of expression of the continuing gifts in the worship services, but it would definitely be considered a charismatic church.


9. The Aspiring Theologian
December 18, 2006
1:10 PM

All too often writers throw around the word “Gospel” without stating (or possibly even understanding) what it means. The “Gospel” is becoming just another nonsense word for many people who don’t know any better.

If you end up only preaching half a Gospel (i.e. no sin, only “feel good” message) then you are bound to end up having people who are only half a Christian.

Blessings in Christ,
Albert Shepherd
The Aspiring Theologian

Knight of the Living God


10. Blake Law
December 18, 2006
1:47 PM

I think Lakewood should take a look at that ‘Fantasy Church’ parody you wrote up a while ago,
and P.S. - when I said your 10 Year Relfection was a hagiography, I just meant it was a biography of a saint! not idealizing!


11. Tim Challies
December 18, 2006
1:47 PM

“All too often writers throw around the word “Gospel” without stating (or possibly even understanding) what it means. The “Gospel” is becoming just another nonsense word for many people who don’t know any better.”

Amen! Your point is valid and true. The word has lost so much of its meaning. I went to a church where the pastor spoke of “being the gospel.” That seems to show a great misunderstanding! The gospel is not something we are or do, but something we declare.


12. disputatio
December 18, 2006
1:59 PM

The rise of Joel Osteen kind of reminds me of the rise of Conan O’Brien. When they debuted they were both shaky, rough around the edges, and generally not very appealing. You sensed latent potential, but couldn’t help but wonder whether they were ever going make it in the business, or continue to struggle and ultimately amount to nothing more than a flash in the pan. But they hung in there, developed better material, slowly gained a following, withstood the naysayers, and finally came into their own.

The only difference between them is that when I watch Conan O’Brien I laugh, but when I watch Joel Osteen I cry (okay…I admit it, sometimes I laugh too).


13. hmmmm
December 18, 2006
2:02 PM

Tim Challies said:

“The gospel is not something we are or do, but something we declare.”

Doesn’t the Bible speak of “obeying” the gospel?


14. donsands
December 18, 2006
2:33 PM

If even an angel comes with a different gospel let him be accursed.

Strong words for us all. May God grant us the courage to speak the pure gospel truth. Satan is cunning, and he, if possible, could even deceive the elect.

Thanks for the review. Joel, seems to me, has just jumped in where his dad left off, and was swept away with people who are all excited about going to his church to hear things that make them feel good about themselves.

I pray the Lord would convict his heart to teach the Word of the Lord; from Genesis to Revelation.


15. Desiree
December 18, 2006
2:37 PM

Our family just relocated to Houston this summer — which is where Joel’s church is. He is popular here, no doubt. But what is surprising to us is that there are many mega-churches in this city! There is a popular church here that actually shows their church service in movie theaters around the city! Their advertisement says, “Now Showing: Second Baptist”. Churches here make big claims like “video games in sunday school!” Shortly after moving here, we got a card in the mail that said “Come to our church. Each family gets a bag of groceries and each child gets a toy!” It is unreal to see these church campuses that are as big as college campuses. I could go on!

A coworker invited us to his megachurch by saying, “You can slip in and slip out. Nobody knows if you’re there or not!”

Houston is an industrious city. People here make good livings, in monetary terms. But in some ways, I think the churches reflect this “luxury” lifestyle.

I can’t remember which puritan said this, but a great quote nonetheless: “What you save them with is what you save them to.”


16. Tim Challies
December 18, 2006
3:22 PM

“What you save them with is what you save them to.”

Mark Dever, isn’t it? I’ve heard him say it a few times. Of course he’s no Puritan (he may be in theology, but certainly not in age).


17. Desiree
December 18, 2006
3:56 PM

I’d say you’re right, Tim! I like the quote - Puritan or not! :)


18. Cary Palmer
December 18, 2006
3:57 PM

Question: See Bibliomaniac above. I’m Calvinist/Reformed (so to speak) so I have great appreciation for what Biblemaniac said about Spurgeon and a lasting ministry. Obviously he is still quoted and is blessing people even today. Great/No Problem/.I do; however, have a long standing question about “The Prince of Preachers”.If he was so good - Why was he followed in ministry by a ranting Arminian? . I think Pearson was his name?I have some ideas but need to hear from others-this really perplexes me. Was he a good teacher or just a great orator. How could his Church fill the pulpit with a someone opposed to Calvinism if they appreciated more than his oratory ?
Honestly
Perplexed
Cary Palmer

I know one is not does not automatically become a Calvinist just by hearing it aND i KNOW gOD IS SOVERIGN. I’m looking for something Historically specefic


19. Tim Challies
December 18, 2006
4:04 PM

“What you save them with is what you save them to.”

Relevintage says this quote comes from James Boice.


20. D. C. Markel
December 18, 2006
5:48 PM

I know a lot about Lakewood since I live in the Houston area.

First, Joel Osteen only has one semester of college education and never went to seminary. He supposedly preached only one public sermon before his father died. His bible knowledge appears to be weak. Listen to the Bible Answer Man and once in a while they will play an audio snipet of Osteen’s Easter story - it’s riddled with unbiblical details.

Second, I’ve never attended that church in person, but my poor naive mother-in-law loves him and she’s a Southern Baptist. One sermon that had me in absolute agony this past Labor Day weekend was Osteen telling his congregation and TV audience is that “God is pleased with you”. He said that after every sentence for about 15 minutes and never talked about sin nor repentance. After the sermon he asked the TV audience if any of them don’t know Jesus, please ask him now to be your Savior. I thought why should they? God is pleased with them already!

Third, from what I’ve recently read, except for the rock group U2, Osteen sells more tickets through Ticketmaster than any other “entertainer”. At $10 a ticket at a sold out 15k to 20K venues, its safe that he rakes in the big bucks with his positive thinking / name-it-and-claim-it message.

Fourth, his latest best selling book, “Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential” is a theological mess plus the fact it is just old recycled stuff from Norman Vincent Peale & Robert Schuller (positive thinking gurus) combined with some Oral Roberts. Sadly, some people think it’s the great book ever written. See all the reviews including mine at Amazon.com. People either hate it (like me) or love it.

Fifth, Osteen’s wife was recently fined and thrown off a plane for hitting an airline attendant. Lakewood issued a spin doctor letter saying that it was just some people trying to exploit them for their fame. Yeah right!

Last, if you go to their church website, their pages dedicated to missions is a travesty for a church of that size. Nothing at all regarding foreign missions and the only local stuff is recommending people to attend an Osteen event or them recommending joining a local volunteer organization like Habitat for Humanity or a food pantry. A church with 30,000 members can’t do something more than that? How pathetically sad.


21. Justin Buzzard
December 18, 2006
5:55 PM

Thanks for posting this Tim.
Did you catch Osteen’s interview with Barbara Walters last week?
My recent post on that interview has generated an interesting comment thread that dovetails nicely with your concerns over this hagiographic book. It has been especially interesting to read and interact with comments made by people who attend Osteen’s church.


22. Joshua Stewart
December 18, 2006
6:14 PM

Every time I think about Osteen I cannot help but being reminded of Richard Niebuhr famous statement, which I believe would be a good description of Osteen’s ministry (an I use that lightly).
“A God without wrath, brought men without sin, into a kingdom without judgment, through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.”
Niebuhr wrote this to describe theological liberalism— and as I said maybe people like Osteen.


23. Russ
December 18, 2006
8:20 PM

Cary Palmer:

Re: Spurgeon’s succesor. I believe Iain Murray discusses how that came about in his book “Forgotten Spurgeon.” I don’t remember the details off the top of my head, but then you probably have already read the book. While others are much better qualified to answer, I would speculate that it has to do with the overall trend in the church at that time and that Spurgeon was one of only a few trying to go against the tide.


24. donsands
December 18, 2006
8:39 PM

I have been reading James White’s, Pulpit Crimes, and here’s a quote on page 124: “What you win them with is what you win them to.”

Interesting, don’t you think.

BTW, this is an excellent book, and every pastor/teacher would be blessed and encouraged to read it, in my humble opinion. Reformed and Non-Reformed alike.


25. Steve H
December 18, 2006
9:30 PM

Desiree said: “Houston is an industrious city. People here make good livings, in monetary terms. But in some ways, I think the churches reflect this “luxury” lifestyle.”

Christ told the church at Laodicea that while it thought it was rich, it was actually naked and destitute. I fear from my viewing of Osteen that he is really poor in the things that matter, along with his church.

But then, this is becoming my opinion of churches
in general. As Paul predicted, people having itching ears, are piling up teachers who will give them what they want to hear. It is true in the NW Ohio community where I live.

I have been attending an Evangelical Free church where the pastor recently had the “points” of his sermon correspond to the titles of songs from the late 60’s and early 70’s. It was shocking. Yet in talking to a doctor recently who attends the church, he was convinced that it was committed to biblical preaching and was not seeker friendly. I am sick of coffee ministries, worship teams, programs for kids that are nothing but entertainment, and flakey praise songs that are horizontal ion nature instead of singing of the majesty of the Most High. Many churches are Lakewood if only on a smaller scale.


26. Steve H
December 18, 2006
9:31 PM

Desiree said: “Houston is an industrious city. People here make good livings, in monetary terms. But in some ways, I think the churches reflect this “luxury” lifestyle.”

Christ told the church at Laodicea that while it thought it was rich, it was actually naked and destitute. I fear from my viewing of Osteen that he is really poor in the things that matter, along with his church.

But then, this is becoming my opinion of churches
in general. As Paul predicted, people having itching ears, are piling up teachers who will give them what they want to hear. It is true in the NW Ohio community where I live.

I have been attending an Evangelical Free church where the pastor recently had the “points” of his sermon correspond to the titles of songs from the late 60’s and early 70’s. It was shocking. Yet in talking to a doctor recently who attends the church, he was convinced that it was committed to biblical preaching and was not seeker friendly. I am sick of coffee ministries, worship teams, programs for kids that are nothing but entertainment, and flakey praise songs that are horizontal ion nature instead of singing of the majesty of the Most High. Many churches are Lakewood if only on a smaller scale.


27. Brian
December 18, 2006
10:39 PM

The thing which most concerns me about Osteen and similar ministries, is their lack of resonance with the New Testament writers. In Jesus’ statements in the gospels, as well as Peter, Paul’s, John’s, etc. writings, you see a harsh realism. This realism is exhibited in their theology, the application of that theology, and in their descriptions of their own lives. It was a realism which was honest about the pain and the hardships, yet lived in the hope of unspeakable blessings which would one day be revealed to the saints.

I’m afraid that Osteen is leading many up the garden path of humanistic optimism, devoid of a faith borne out of a real relationship with the God of the Bible.

As C.S. Lewis said, “Christianity simply does not make sense until you have faced the sort of facts I have been describing. Christianity tells people to repent and promises them forgiveness. It therefore has nothing (as far as I know) to say to people who do not know they have done anything to repent of and who do not feel that they need forgiveness.”

I do believe the Kingdom of God brings improvement in our lives here on Earth, but only after it solves the more vital issues of our eternal standing before God. Too many ministers preach as if we should all be looking for our full reward here on Earth and I am concerned for those who are deceived into this mindset.


28. Will Lee
December 19, 2006
10:39 AM

There seems to have been a flurry of blog posts on Osteen and Lakewood Church recently. I wrote one, calling him the “most dangerous man in the world.” I thought maybe I was over-reacting at first, but judging by the posts I’ve read here and all over the blogosphere, I guess I’m not alone in my assessment.

Galatians 1:6-9 6 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.

If Osteen is indeed preaching a non-gospel, then our criticisms are valid, and I think Paul would be sadly pleased to say about Joel, “Let him be accursed.”


29. Josh
December 19, 2006
11:20 AM

There is a straight line from Charles Finney to D.L. Moody to Billy Sunday to Billy Graham.

Is this supposed to be a compliment?

The pulpit is for preaching the gospel not for personal gain and its shameful to do so.

Josh
“…the word of God is not bound.”
—2 Timothy 2:9


30. Lee
December 19, 2006
11:33 AM

Tim said: “A man like Finney has left an enduring legacy, but not a positive one.” I think this is an understatement

Will Lee said: “most dangerous man in the world.” I don’t think this is an understatement.

We should not underestimate or make light of how dangerous Osteen’s teaching is. I know at least 3 non Christians who enjoy Osteen precisely because of his sugar-coated, feel-good, preaching that is utterly devoid of the simple Gospel message that we are all sinners in need of a Savior.

I mourn and fear for the souls of those non Christians who have received a false assurance from the likes of Osteen, and to be honest, I fear for Osteen as well. These folks are in danger of eternal damnation.

Of course we can take comfort that God is sovereign and His elect will be saved, but this should motivate us even more to counteract this insidious teaching with the pure Gospel.


31. Michael
December 19, 2006
11:55 AM

Lee said: “I know at least 3 non Christians who enjoy Osteen precisely because of his sugar-coated, feel-good, preaching that is utterly devoid of the simple Gospel message that we are all sinners in need of a Savior”

As a recently “saved” individual, I was one of those to whom the Right Reverend Osteen had great appeal. I often wondered why more evangelist/pastors couldn’t be more like him. He never made me feel like a sinner. I never really thought about him much after I was saved until someone gave me his book. After reading through his book and watching his “show” on TV and seeing a couple of interviews with him, I realized why I liked him so much as a sinner. I would have never come to The Lord based on anything I ever heard from him. Take that as it is, that’s just my “before and after” experience.


32. Morris Brooks
December 19, 2006
2:22 PM

A friend made a comment to me last night about Matthew 7:13-14. Both the narrow gate and the wide gate have the same sign hanging over them, “This way to heaven,” unfortunately, the wide gate never takes you there.
In America, especially, size matters. It is easy for churches and their pastors to get caught up with themselves and change their message and their method to “bring them in” and then use the numbers to validate what they are doing. Their concern is for the size of the crowd, not the content of the message. Therefore the content of the message is changed/coerced to make sure the size of the crowd does not dwindle. They get “positive” feedback from the attendees because their message plays to the crowd. It is like feeding your children candy at meals. They will squeal with delight, and tell you they want more, so you continue to feed them candy because you get “positive” feedback. That is exactly what is going on in churches today. The pastors feed them what they like, get postive feedback from them and continue to feed them more of the spiritual candy. No wonder our churches are so spiritually weak and pathetic.


33. centuri0n
December 19, 2006
5:58 PM

Let me say that this is why Challies remains the greatest Christian blogger in the world: he can dish on the Osteen bio and nobody gets after him about it.

That’s what I want for Christmas: teflon britches.


34. centuri0n
December 19, 2006
5:59 PM

Josh:

That was my other comment, and I did’t post it because you beat me to it.


35. Justin Buzzard
December 19, 2006
11:45 PM

I’m continuing to get a good number of Lakewood members coming to the defense of Joel’s message on my Osteen/Walters comment thread. I’m thankful that at least one member/commentor from Lakewood is appearing interested in thinking through whether or not Osteen’s message really is gospel-less. I’m praying for these people. I’m praying that they’d come to understand the gospel. I’d love it if some of you would be willing to help by offering humble, thoughtful responses to some of these commentors.


36. Josh
December 20, 2006
10:42 AM

Well I probably learned some of that from that paper you posted this summer on Finney so H/T to Cent.

Osteen saved a lot of folks I know from jumping on his bandwagon with that Larry King comment, which I think show his true colors. I’ve seen this TV—TeleVangelist—show before back in the 70’s and 80’s and that mess ended in tears.

Josh
“…the word of God is not bound.”
—2 Timothy 2:9


37. drlizw
December 21, 2006
12:50 AM

Just wanted to caution those who may tar every “mega church” with the same brush as Osteen. This begs the question, if big and growing is always bad, does that mean that small and shrinking is a sign of a healthy church?

While “mega churches” may have some unique problems, they also have some unique opportunities. Not all follow the “prosperity” doctrine of Osteen.

I’ve also seen a pastor (and I suspect he’s not unique) who bad-mouths larger churches (IMHO) to avoid looking at his own weaknesses and faults as a pastor. So, for example, declining membership is held up as a sign that he is preaching the gospel so truthfully and forcibly as to drive lukewarm Christians away, and not an indication of his own arrogance and abrasiveness.


38. Caleb
December 21, 2006
8:11 AM

Thanks for this great review!

Caleb Kolstad


39. Desma
December 24, 2006
8:21 PM

My name is Desma Douglas, and i would like for Joel Osteen to send me a daily inspriational to my email.

Thanks!


40. Steve
December 27, 2006
9:57 PM

It’s unfortunate that “Joel Osteen” and “Christianity” appear in the same sentence since they are antithetical. Shame on Mr Osteen and those who look up to him.


41. HaNavi'
December 27, 2006
10:48 PM

Issues Etc., out of KFUO 850 AM from St Louis, a broadcast of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod will regularly feature Joel Osteen sermon reviews. Invariably, Osteen’s sermons fail the Christian test, which is fairly simple. Essentially, it breaks down to: Is Jesus mentioned and is He the subject of the verb? There are other criteria, but these sufficient.

Ken, err…Osteen does nothing more than psychology. It’s doubtful I’ve ever heard Jesus mentioned by name more than 5 times of all the times I’ve heard him. Usually, it’s only in the “receive Jesus” or the “This is my Bible…” sections.

In short, they’re in a stadium, but they ain’t in church. They’re getting free psychology, not free theology.


42. Jim Swindle
December 28, 2006
10:21 AM

HaNavi said, “In short, they’re in a stadium, but they ain’t in church.”

I, too, live in the Houston area. I’ve met some Lakewood people who appear to be true Christians, but Joel’s unsound at best and dangerous at worst. I believe it was Philip Yancey who asked the haunting question, “What would an institution be like that looked like a church, but wasn’t?”


43. Bernie of FreeGoodNews.com
December 29, 2006
12:27 PM

There’s a lot of money to be made in these high-profile ministries, as some are finding out (like Joel Osteen). Here’s a report for 2006:

“2006 Hall of Fame and Shame”
http://www.freegoodnews.com/2006/12/reformation_200.html

…Bernie


44. Scott
December 29, 2006
1:34 PM

The title of the book itself tells you what Osteen is all about. It’s about his rise, oh but I know, it’s the Lord’s blessing for his positive attitude. It’s not like Osteen denies most of the criticisms. He just doesn’t care. He was here in Charlotte a couple of years ago and the local paper interviewed him and during this interview Osteen said that “explaining the Scriptures” wasn’t what he tried to do in his sermons. No kidding! Thanks for the great review!