And This is Who Hillsong & C3 Look Up To

35 thoughts on “And This is Who Hillsong & C3 Look Up To

  1. Umm, yes…. PP thinks he’s great and gets lots of people “saved” (yes, those exact words spoken to someone near and dear) – how, I wonder, if he’s not preaching the gospel? We know he won’t address the topic of sin because “it’s not his job”.

    Hillsong had him as keynote speaker, the above applies.

  2. ‘Cyber bully’? Still being horrible to people, teddy, even after name calling has virtually shut this site down!

    If FL is a ‘cyber bully’ what would that make the infamous Reformed Theology twins? Something closer to Despotic Duo?

    This is not a pleasant site!

  3. tut tut tut Newsong – Despotic duo?

    I think you need to sit down with a warm cup of jarrah (and a bit of Aker Bilk’s “Pipe of Peace” playing in the background for ambience) in the “safe” confines of the reflection room and reflect on what you have said and how you have inflicted horrible pain – is that how a christian should behave?

  4. Hasn’t sir Pringle blatantly plagiarized Osteen’s catch phrase “your best life now” and plastered it all over his church stationery and website?
    I sometimes wonder if the man has an original thought in that head of his.

    Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery – so they say anyways.
    What more proof does one need?

  5. No, no, Mosco. That was merely comparative musing on the basis of FL being a cyber bully, which, of course, he isn’t, anymore than 5 Point Spurgeon is one half of a despotic duo. You guys, between you, make FL look positively passive. Jarrah? Aker Bilk? All we need now is blah blah and… well what do you know!

  6. I’m no more FL than you are Mosco…

    ‘Though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. Now this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I may be partaker of it with you.’

  7. @ NewSong -I had an epiphany the other day thinking about you and the penny dropped.

    You are a cyber-bully.

    I find the thought quite disturbing. You follow people around the web who you don’t agree with and it’s not enough to dialogue in a reasonable manner, you encourage scorn towards various well-regarded men i.e. Macarthur, Piper, Driscoll, Rosebrough, in the Christian community at the same time highlighting yourself (along with Kenneth Hagin) as some rather capable Rhema-trained “theologians”?

    What is to be noted, there are various theological disagreements among these men but they have the God-honouring ability to maintain close friendships.

    A hallmark of the typical cyber-bully behaviour is threatening to “expose” people, sending harassing emails and, how interesting, switching identities.

    How many aliases have you used so far, to enable yourelf to post on sites where you’ve been blocked?

    All this said, a cyber-bully hiding behind a computer screen is one thing.

    A cyber-bully who pastors a church is another.

  8. @ NewSong – I’m not interested in dialoguing privately, and I’m not going to allow my email address come into your domain. The words spoken above are from my heart and it’s time you, as a pastor, start taking how you treat others seriously. What goes on between you and others on this blog has nothing to do with me – being a “reformed ex-C3” seems to be the only reason you have taken to battle with me.

  9. I’ll do a deal. Stop saying bad things about C3, and I’ll stop defending them when I think you’re wrong!

    I have nothing personal against you, for any reason whatsoever.

    It is you who seeks censorship, not I.

  10. Not “bad” things – observations about C3 are made by all who have blogged here. As has been said before this is a “place of refuge” for those hurt/broken by the church. And one of those churches is C3.

  11. I think you’re kidding yourself if you think this is a place of refuge. It hasn’t been for some time, and that is nothing to do with me. It’s a slagging ground for certain ministries, that’s all. Just go through the most recent posts! Say, for the last year!

    As I say, if you want to continue this conversation, I have given you my email address. Please do things decently. I’ll discuss doctrine or issues on blogs, but I will not bicker with you publicly.

    Otherwise your accusations are indefensible. And completely wrong.

    The offer is there, and your privacy is guaranteed.

    I owe you nothing but to love you.

  12. And you’re right – it ceased to be a place of refuge when you started attacking anyone who expressed concerns about C3.

  13. I like Piper. He, at least, is not a cessationist. I disagree with some of his doctrine, that is all.

    I have never commented on Driscoll.

    I have critiqued McArthur for being a cessationist. He is also sometimes antagonistic in his approach. Disagreeing with someone isn’t claiming theological superiority. I agree with many things he says, and have no personal vendetta against him. If he wrongly criticises someone, I put up a case. If he wrongly teaches something, I say what I think.

    That is the nature of blogging.

    Rosbrough is a radio/blog critic. I have only twice criticised his criticism. I would like you to show me where he discloses his theological background, training, and church affiliation on his site, because I can’t seem to find it to see where he is coming from. I don’t actually have time to listen to his entire programs. I know he was wrong about Wagner’s doctrine on one segment, and pointed it out, with scriptural references.

    That is blogging! It’s what some of us do!

    When you and speckandplanks stop using a pseudonym, I will!

  14. ‘it ceased to be a place of refuge when you started attacking anyone who expressed concerns about C3.’


    I don’t attack. I ask for reasons for claims to be clarified. I discuss or challenge doctrinal error. I comment on issues and have an opinion.

    That is blogging.

    I have generally been courteous to new people, whether they are pro-C3 or con.

    Most newcomers have been set upon by some regulars for expressing concerns about the claims made about their churches and leaders. Many don’t return.

    I can only think of one strong retort I made to a new-comer, when he called PP a satanist for having a funny hand signal, and that was tongue in cheek, because I thought he was actually joking!!!! I still think it’s a joke!

    You’re too ready to blame me for the woes of this blog. It’s demise will come because it refuses to listen to its own membership, so they go off to a more gentle stream. I had nothing to do with that.

    Cyber-bully??????????? How ridiculous.

    It’s a blog, and we are bloggers. That is all!

  15. Of course, but are you also looking at your own behaviour first?

    I am not the one making groundless public accusations!

    I have given you access to my personal world by giving you my email. I am asking you to be courteous to use this means of levelling accusations if you must. I am being as open and as accountable as I can be.

  16. Facelift is a LIAR.

    LIE 1. “I don’t attack.”
    You’ve attacked me (sometimes – fair enough). You’ve attacked RP. You attacked Lance on the older Signpost. You also remember you laying a solid attack on a C3 student. LordQ?

    LIE 2. “I ask for reasons for claims to be clarified.”
    You do – but you like the idea more that you are doing it. Because you like the idea more, you don’t exactly listen and hold stubbornly to your beliefs. You then drive people away with your opinions, rightness and your sense of martyrdom.

    Classic one was my claim of C3 being a gnostic cult. I gave enough evidence. You simply grabbed the pig and blocked out the sound of any proof. When I did find significant proof, it was wazza, Teddy and even RP that wanted to see your response – you didn’t WANT to respond. BUT you were still right.

    All you can defend is the C3 church you belong to now and not have an honest opinion in case you get in trouble. But I am still wrong and you are still right.

    LIE 3. “I discuss or challenge doctrinal error. I comment on issues and have an opinion.”
    You do more than that – you make the entire post evolve around you with your opinions. You continually could not see past yourself and caused divisions with your arrogant ability to look right. This is not ‘discussion’. This is manipulative power-play.

    LIE 4. “I am not the one making groundless public accusations!”
    So you are saying I among others have made groundless public accusations after given firsthand testimonies? There has been the quotes, the booklets, the transcripts, C3 Balmain and those of the likes to indicate that there are serious problems with the C3 movement and it’s pastors – serious theological issues included.

    Frankly Facelift, you deny evidence and have repelled more people posting on this blog than me or anyone else combined.

    Over the past few years I have shown you continued grace to keep blogging on Signposts02. This was in spite of people complaining about your conduct on Signposts02. Not Teddy’s conduct. Not my conduct. Not RP’s, Heretics, Wazza’s or other people’s conduct. It was YOUR conduct!

    In fact it is you that has made groundless accusations against me. I’ve said enough about what I exactly do at C3. A lot of your accusations against me are based on erroneous assumption.

    Still you have not changed. You are still manipulative and divisive. So I can see why it’s logical that you are attracted to the C3 movement and joined it (in spite of your previous disagreements with it).

    Like I said last year – go see a counsellor. Do NOT come back. If you don’t like what Signposts02 is saying – start up your own blog and make any comment you want about some of the claims we make.

    I’m fine with that. But do not brings your lies, deceit, delusions and divisions back here again on Signposts02. I have blocked you from responding. This means you will probably be pissed off because your alias’ reputation has just been damaged.

    Get the message – you are not welcome!

  17. No worries! Love you to!

    You’re on your own with the gnostic claim. No one agrees with you! You never proved it to yourself, let alone anyone else.

    Changing the pseudonym to back up teddy is an astonishing act for a moderator. Unprecedented in blogging history, I imagine. Congratulations.

    My regards to Mosco, who, at least quits himself like a Christian, even if he can be a bit rough around the edges sometimes. He made FL look positively tame and still survives here. Amazing feat! I’ll miss our conversations, Mosco! A worthy discussion guru.

    I’m sorry you couldn’t see the repentance and improved behaviour of NewS••g. I think he was rather polite and courteous to people.

    But there we are. There’s no room for change in some quarters. Only condemnation.

    Love you too, teddy! We’ll meet agin, I’m sure.

    I can’t seem to make any of this come out right, just or Christian somehow!

    I’m gone!

  18. Know this folks. As long as speckandplanks can mess with your IP this way, and is prepared to do so, nothing is safe!

    I’m gone too!

  19. You make it hard to leave, when you continually bait.

    What is it that you want?

    You levelled the accusation, refuse to discuss it privately, and encourage s&p to confirm your cause. Isn’t that enough?

    Would you like blood, or a pound of flesh? Are you enjoying inflicting pain?

    Here, have the other cheek…

  20. I would like to go. I had planned, today, to go. Quietly, until your unkind outburst. This site bears no resemblance to the original Signposts, as Greg has said many times.

    Today it is even less like Signposts, which even allowed Lance to air his views, and in very strong terms and language. It was forgiving and gracious, and very open.

    The issues it discussed were important, but they were varied, and not mono-focused on condemning one or two ministries, like this place.

    I was going to say this sight should be renamed, or shut down. It has outlived its usefulness, if it ever had any.

    No one really comments on the latest posts, except out of politeness. The only conversation for months has been on Reformed vs Arminian doctrine.

    Something needs to change. Seriously!

  21. I’m glad, for you, that you have reached some conclusions, teddy. I’ve been trying to conclude too! I don’t like leaving with a put down, when it is not true. It may be a fault I have.

    Fortunately for me, the only conclusion I need to hear is the One that God comes to, and not yours.

    If I am judged by you in this way, then so be it. I will not presume to judge you in any way, since I do not know you. I admire your tenacity and dogged certainty about everything you believe in.

    I am sure that you are a fabulous person, and a wonderful mother and grandmother. God’s love and best to you and to your family.

    All the best!

  22. I was friggin right!!!! you are FL!!! damn Im good – I could tell straight away when you started using Newsong –

    Which C3 do you pastor in WA? Rockingham, Crawley, Joondalup…..

  23. @ 5 Point – how did you miss that, we all knew he was FL, he kept changing his ID to come on the blog after he was banned.

  24. Damn – dont I feel like the idiot….here I was thinking I had evidence for a still smaill voice

Comments are closed.