LOL, look what I did.
I said "profit" when I meant "prophet." Ha, I bet people thought I did that on purpose. The whole thing is so tied to money in my mind that that was an entirely subconscious slip.
One time I prepared a document in which I wrote "manner house" as opposed to "manor house" in one instance. Someone caught it, of course, and I made this joke on the spot: Of course when in a manor house you mind your manners!
Osteen is a major false prophet.
Is he even a "profit"? Anyway, what's the difference between a false profit and a true profit? I mean, what's the process for making that determination (is there something more to it than that they say or don't say what you want to hear)? And is there such a thing as a minor false profit?
Another good indicator is someone who says what needs to be said at the time, even if people don't comprehend its truth until much later. It's easy to contradict Osteen with a basic knowledge of the Bible, and it's plain to see that the spirit of his message is one of complacency and convenience and greed. It's something Christians ought to be furious about.
I don't doubt that - if I were a Christian, particularly Laudian or high church, I would see him as the most corrosive of all because of his inside status (he's not some atheist or somebody on the outside), and his congregation is the size of a small army.
As to real vs. false prophet, it is a subjective call probably left to the faithful to make.
