[KJBPrincess]

What do you all think of Pastor Steve Anderson and his doctrine?

If you don't know who he is, or what he believes, please check out some of these website before posting.

http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/ (his church website)

http://www.youtube.com/user/sanderson1611 (his youtube profile full of preaching videos)

http://www.repentanceblacklist.com/ (another website created by him)

I'll be honest here. I decided to start a discussion on this after I saw a Facebook group titled "20th Century Heroes of the Faith" with Steve Anderson's name at the top of the list.

In my opinion, the guy's ideas are wacked. He teaches a lot of weird things, and he doesn't believe repentance should be taught as part of salvation. (he obviously doesn't understand the true meaning of repentance)

So anyway... don't take my word for it, go look at the websites and post what you think about it.

[Luke]

He came from your old church.

Some of his stuff is silly. Most of his stuff is good. I don't agree with his mid-trib position, and I wouldn't call him a great hero of the faith (although, the others in that facebook group I would - Jack Hyles, Al Lacey, Kent Hovind and Curtis Hutson).

But I wouldn't worry about him. Either God will deal with him or bless him and people will listen to him or ignore him.

[KJBPrincess]

I dunno if I could say most of his stuff is good... his church website says on their doctrine page that they are "non-dispensational." I've never seen that term used before, but I'm assuming it means that they reject dispensationalism in all forms. That just seems pretty strange to me.

[Luke]

Nah, he means he rejects different salvation in different dispensations. "Look forward to the cross, back to the cross etc".

He still teaches dispensations, since he believes in the Church age, Millennial Kingdom, Innocence etc.

Originally Posted by KJBPrincess

What do you all think of Pastor Steve Anderson and his doctrine?

If he were an older man, I would say that he is a rogue and a charlatan. Because of his youth, I will simply say that he appears to be immature, unstable, and preposterously impressed with himself. I wouldn't follow him out of a burning building.

I trust that answers your question, sister?

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

If he were an older man, I would say that he is a rogue and a charlatan. Because of his youth, I will simply say that he appears to be immature, unstable, and preposterously impressed with himself. I wouldn't follow him out of a burning building.

I trust that answers your question, sister?

Why? I've watched lots of his sermons and I don't understand where this hostility towards him stems from. What does he preach that you all seem to dislike so much? Is it his midtrib stuff? Seriously, I've never heard him say a single thing about dispensationalism at all. Now I've only seen maybe 1/8th of his sermons on youtube, but I doubt he preaches this stuff at his church. Is it his stance on easy believism? He believes in repentance, he just doesn't like people telling others you have to stop sinning in order to be saved. Is that wrong? So, PLEASE instead of these little unfounded jabs against the man, can we get something solid on him that you all don't like?

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Originally Posted by stephanos

Why? I've watched lots of his sermons and I don't understand where this hostility towards him stems from. What does he preach that you all seem to dislike so much? Is it his midtrib stuff? Seriously, I've never heard him say a single thing about dispensationalism at all. Now I've only seen maybe 1/8th of his sermons on youtube, but I doubt he preaches this stuff at his church. Is it his stance on easy believism? He believes in repentance, he just doesn't like people telling others you have to stop sinning in order to be saved. Is that wrong? So, PLEASE instead of these little unfounded jabs against the man, can we get something solid on him that you all don't like?

A simple glance at the men he so arrogantly dismisses on his "Repentance Blacklist" will go far toward explaining my antipathy. He has no respect for men who have spent their lives laboring in the field, unless they use precisely the terminology he prefers; he rejects dispensational truth, which means, by definition, that he teaches error; and, in my opinion, he has a positive zeal for self-promotion. (I will acknowledge that I may be mistaken in the latter case; I'm merely stating my impressions.) These, dear brother, are not "unfounded jabs." I'm not on a crusade against the man; I merely answered a question.

And I've been around the track long enough to recognize youthful arrogance when I see it. But, if Anderson's heart is right - - - and charity suggests that I must assume so - - - then God will straighten out his immaturity. I sincerely hope that He does it gently.

[MC1171611]

Being that I am younger than even he, I'm careful in what I say (publicly) about him. However, I will say this: he seems to teach (and post YouTube videos of) the weirdest possible subjects, as if he is trying to make a name for himself but publicizing his preaching. From what I've heard from others, he's also an internet forum troll using hit-and-run tactics to spread his doctrine/teachings and avoiding actual discussion. (I haven't personally experienced this personally, but you can Google his username, "Sanderson1769" or variations thereof)

One of the problems I see with the whole "Repentance" crowd, on both sides, is the incorrect way they all seem to interpret the word or doctrine; he is no exception. In fact, they all seem to define repentance the same way, but one side avoids repentance while the other one crams it down peoples' throats. Repentance, as has been discussed in other places, is simply a change of heart or mind on a subject: it has nothing intrinsically to do with sin. Repentance, as it deals with Salvation, simply means to turn to Christ, away from whatever that person is trusting in or what is between them and the Saviour, be it sin, good works, unbelief or anything else. When people like Anderson teach that Repentance is always from sin (and therefore is not a part of Salvation), and people on the other side of the argument teach that a person must forsake their sin and accept Christ as their Lord and Saviour in order to be saved, then both sides are in a ditch.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by MC1171611

Being that I am younger than even he, I'm careful in what I say (publicly) about him. However, I will say this: he seems to teach (and post YouTube videos of) the weirdest possible subjects, as if he is trying to make a name for himself but publicizing his preaching. From what I've heard from others, he's also an internet forum troll using hit-and-run tactics to spread his doctrine/teachings and avoiding actual discussion. (I haven't personally experienced this personally, but you can Google his username, "Sanderson1769" or variations thereof)

One of the problems I see with the whole "Repentance" crowd, on both sides, is the incorrect way they all seem to interpret the word or doctrine; he is no exception. In fact, they all seem to define repentance the same way, but one side avoids repentance while the other one crams it down peoples' throats. Repentance, as has been discussed in other places, is simply a change of heart or mind on a subject: it has nothing intrinsically to do with sin. Repentance, as it deals with Salvation, simply means to turn to Christ, away from whatever that person is trusting in or what is between them and the Saviour, be it sin, good works, unbelief or anything else. When people like Anderson teach that Repentance is always from sin (and therefore is not a part of Salvation), and people on the other side of the argument teach that a person must forsake their sin and accept Christ as their Lord and Saviour in order to be saved, then both sides are in a ditch.

I've never seen Steve Anderson define sin as always from sin. I know for a fact, well at least from what he has said on at least one occassion, that repentance is what you just said, a turning/change of heart. Steve, as well as myself, are just sick and tired (I really am tbh) of people telling others they gotta get right before God in order to be saved.

Anywho, I should cut short on this one since I'm getting irritated.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

A simple glance at the men he so arrogantly dismisses on his "Repentance Blacklist" will go far toward explaining my antipathy. He has no respect for men who have spent their lives laboring in the field, unless they use precisely the terminology he prefers; he rejects dispensational truth, which means, by definition, that he teaches error; and, in my opinion, he has a positive zeal for self-promotion. (I will acknowledge that I may be mistaken in the latter case; I'm merely stating my impressions.) These, dear brother, are not "unfounded jabs." I'm not on a crusade against the man; I merely answered a question.

And I've been around the track long enough to recognize youthful arrogance when I see it. But, if Anderson's heart is right - - - and charity suggests that I must assume so - - - then God will straighten out his immaturity. I sincerely hope that He does it gently.

Your comment wasn't the one I think is an unfounded jab. Anywho, I wrote the maintainer of that blacklist site an email. Hopefully I'll hear back from them. I think that site is uncalled for. Ultimately I want to see Steve's work bear fruite (and there is no doubt that it has) but I also want to see that the rough edges he has get smoothed out. I'll share whatever I hear from the maintainer of that site if I hear from them.

Peace and Love,
Stephen