Popular Christian YouTuber Allen Parr Refuses to Condemn Heretics and Trinity-Deniers

Allen Parr is a popular Christian YouTuber and host of The B.E.A.T (Biblical Encouragement And Truth), an “online video ministry dedicated to communicating God’s word in a creative, practical and easy-to-watch format.” Featuring videos like Should Christians Have Titles…OR NOT?, 5 Things Modern Day Preachers Need To STOP Doing, and The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill Podcast | MY REACTION, Allen teaches theology to his nearly 1 million subscribers, one of the biggest audiences on the platform. 

Parr frequently offers a good amount of proper teaching, yet he repeatedly demonstrates he has fatal blind spots manifested by his refusal to condemn false teachers, specifically men like Joel Osteen and Trinity-deniers Marcus Rogers and T. D Jakes, doing so in the most inconsistent way possible. 

Speaking to Ruslan KD, (who also gives passes to Modalists like Marcus Rogers), Parr explains that there are three categories of bible teachers, Recommended, Not Recommended and False Teachers, and that everyone basically goes in the first two buckets:

Because even someone like Joel Osteen. I don’t agree with prosperity theology, I wish that he would challenge people in the areas of sin, I wish he wouldn’t preach a cotton-candy gospel, I wish that if I actually went to his church, I’d be challenged in areas of purity, holiness, and sanctification, all that stuff.

But I’m gonna be honest. And some of you you’re gonna fight me for this, right? But I’m gonna be honest, if I go to his website, and he adheres to all of the non-negotiable tenant, core beliefs of the Christian faith, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the inerrancy of Scripture, the deity of Christ, all these different things, right? The Trinity and all that stuff. It’s hard for me to label him as a false teacher when he is saying, ‘This is how you can be saved. You need to be saved. And we want to be a church who’s going to help you become saved’ right?

Allen makes several large errors here. First, he promotes “Website Orthodox” which is when a pathological Bible-twister or false teacher has an orthodox statement of faith on their website but ignores it entirely in their body of work, sermons, books or teachings.

It’s easy to have an orthodox statement of faith or doctrinal statement on a website, and false teachers regularly point people back to the website whenever their orthodoxy is challenged. In truth, their “website orthodoxy” is mere cover for their theological confusion and abuse. 

The fact is that every woke, pro-choice, openly lesbian pastrix-leading church in the apostate ELCA or PCUSA has an orthodox statement of faith on their website or has the apostles creed put up somewhere. Here’s a list of 600 gay-affirming churches in New York alone who all have an orthodox statement of faith on their website, demonstrating it’s entirely irrelevant to a church’s soundness.

Parr acknowledges that Osteen’s gospel is marked by prosperity theology, is “cotton-candied” and does not challenge people on sin, holiness and sanctification.” Still, he regards this as a true, biblical gospel.

And this is where I’ve caught flack, is instead of me going around naming a whole bunch of people and saying ‘they’re a false teacher, they’re a false teacher, they’re a false teacher’ I would rather focus on the teachings…I’d rather look at the individual teachings of Joyce Meyer. I’d rather look at Bishop Jake’s teaching, I’d rather look at these different people and say, you know what, because of the fact that he teaches a cotton candy gospel, because he preaches prosperity and health and wealth and a name it claim and positive confession and all this stuff, then these teachings by Joel Osteen or Bishop Jakes, these are false teachings. And therefore I put them in the category of “not recommended.”

If I’m giving advice to a new Christian, and they’re asking me, ‘who were the people that you would recommend I listened to?’ I would not put these people in that category. And that’s where I kind of differ, but does that mean that I can’t have fellowship with these people? You know, and that’s where I see the the toxicity online, particularly in the space that we operate in is like.

Parr points to Lakewood Church’s statement of faith as his justification for affirming Osteen’s orthodoxy, regardless of what the megachurch leaders preaches or doesn’t. Yet Jakes has gone on record saying he doesn’t believe that Jesus is the second person of the Trinity but rather is just a “manifestation” of God. Even now, his website reads, “There is one God, Creator of all things, infinitely perfect, and eternally existing in three manifestations:  Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”

Parr has previously pointed out the Bishop’s problematic website in an earlier video, rightly affirming that Trinity-deniers have “the wrong view of the Trinity, Jesus and salvation.” 

Despite this, he glosses over Jakes’ modalistic statement on his website, offering, “even though Bishop Jakes has since embraced more of a Trinitarian perspective, there’s still a problem with him leaving this type of language on his website, which is the idea of God manifesting Himself in three distinct ways, which is not the typical way that we describe the Trinitarian Godhead.”

Contrary to popular belief, Jakes has never recanted his modalism, yet Parr still won’t condemn him as a false teacher, but rather a brother to freely fellowship with. Can you trust a teacher who can’t identify a wolf like Osteen, the lowest hanging fruit in Christendom, and call him on it? We certainly don’t think so. 

Until Parr gets this right, he’s definitely ‘Not Recommended.’

Editor’s Note. It’s not just Parr. Prominent discernment minister Mike Winger likewise can’t bring himself to call Osteen a false brother, suggesting that he teaches a true gospel. This is categorially false.

In the gospel of Joel Osteen, the “good news” that he brings is that “God loves you and wants to save you from life of mediocrity and small dreams. Therefore, if you believe in God and be obedient to him, God will give you a plan for your life that includes big dreams, self esteem, favor, health and wealth, influence, a better job, a positive self image and a fulfilled life free of negativity”.

That’s it. That’s what it’s all about. That is the sum of just about every book, every sermon, every media appearance, and every tweet of Joel Osteen, condensed into a few sentences.

That being said, there is something significant to understand about Joel Osteen: He does talk about God. A lot. You cannot accuse the man of not mentioning him because he’s all over that. Yet it’s never really in a personal sense. Joel talks about God, but it’s always in a vague, amorphous sense. There is undoubtedly nothing distinctly Christian or Biblical about it. There’s nothing doctrinal or theological about the way he talks about God. Instead, He is an ethereal, shapeless, formless, customizable, singular being thing that is out there called God that functions like a cosmic vending machine whose sole purpose is seeming to bless you and make your life better. Even when he mentions God, it’s not ABOUT God, but it’s about what God can do for YOU.

And while he talks about God a lot, he NEVER talks about Jesus. We did a survey of his Tweets one year and out of nearly a thousand tweets, he mentioned ‘God’ over 330 times and ‘Jesus’ just three time. GT notes:

More often than not, Osteen sounds like an inspirational life-coach, instead of a herald of the gospel. He often preaches about how people can improve their lives, be prosperous, and experience happiness. Noticeably absent in Osteen’s optimistic message is any mention of sin or repentance. The atonement of Christ provides us with healing and the abundant life, according to Osteen, but apparently receiving forgiveness from a holy God is not necessary.

In numerous interviews and writings, Osteen has failed to proclaim that Jesus is the only way to heaven. He has repeatedly refused to agree with the teachings of the Bible that certain behaviors are sinful. This is not a new convert being interviewed; it’s the leader of a church of tens of thousands. Osteen can’t bring himself to support fundamental doctrines of the faith he claims to preach. His words communicate relativism and demonstrate a profoundly poor understanding of the Bible.

When you don’t talk about sin—and Osteen purposefully does not—you’re not preaching the whole gospel. When you barely, if ever, call sin what it is, you’re not helping anyone, least of all the sinner who is enslaved to sin (John 8:34; 2 Corinthians 4:3). Joel Osteen’s teaching would lead us to believe that we are being saved from unhappiness and failure in life, not from sin and God’s wrath. Osteen does not teach that we need a divine rescue from judgment, but rather simply a self-improvement plan.

About Author

Staff Writer

See author's posts

Appreciate our content? Take a second to join the fight with Protestia on Patreon!