B-b-b-brilliant. I think I will talk about the YouTube is pro-life bit on my radio program. You'll have to call!

A. Benny Hinn has lied, and been caught, many times on television. B. I will wait to see the story printed by someone who is not vitally connected to the matter. C. Even if he is found innocent, this in no way changes my position concerning him and those like him. D. The second paragraph of my previous post sums my position up rather well.

I am not at all denying this claim, just wanting more than Benny's word. As a journalism major, diverse sources makes good when wishing to validate any given claim. I do wish, though, to make clear that this post is not only pointing to Hinn. I stand against the entirety of these self-proclaimed prophets and apostles of the gospel of envy and plunder.

Can you provide us with a few links for this story? As a journalism major, multiple sources gives credibility. An attack video? Calling charlatans out for their superfluous lifestyle is "attacking" them? Only a schismatic drunk on the dogmas of depravity would declare as much.

You miss the point. Even if they agree with the substance of what was said in the councils, they don't even have the necessary preconditions whereby the Protestant "church" (a mythological entity) could convene any such council. Even worse, the verdict of any Protestant council would be up for grabs. And what of the doctrinal and ecclesiastical assumptions of all those present? Ignore them? Protestantism is religious pluralism par excellence.