I need help on Wikipedia related to Kent Hovind

If anyone here uses Wikipedia, I am seeking guidance, counsel, advise and most of all help.

my Wikipedia name is Thankful21&3 and I contributed a couple of small statements onto the Article called "Kent Hovind" which can be found on google by typing Kent Hovind.

It is a completely biased article hostile against him, and his work. I only added a few things, for example that "most of his children and his spouses were employees at his backyard "museum/ministry" headquarters. Also after a verse chiding him for not "rendering to Ceaser what is ceasers" I added a clip about how some felt that multiple counts of tax evasion charges for not paying social security taxes, and federal witholds for his kids that he supported for helping in his ministry seemed over the top and adding the verse from Matthew 17:25

"Jesus said "What do you think, Simon?" HE asked. "From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own sons or from others?" "From others," Peter answered. "Then the sons are exempt," Jesus said to him."

I am at war on Wikipedia on the Kent Hovind" article with some haters (possibly just one switch accounts so that I look like a trouble maker against a consens) that keep erasing this fact, and I believe it important in clearing his name Especially with believers who believe that he is disqualified just because he was sent to prison, I also don't want new believers who have received encouragment from his work to be in conflict with his trouble without some balanced facts"

What should I do, I have been threatened with being blocked from Wikipedia because they accuse me of bias, yet the article is bias, and I am just presenting both sides.

I think I need a few others to join in with me so that a mediator can be brought in, as it stands I will be brushed off as a nut, and trouble maker without just cause.

ANYONE?

i was encouraged by his work too, but when Satan is given the ability to wipe out someone, there is no stopping any part of the threshing he is doing, I just pray Kent's treasure in heaven is the love of Christ not what he has done for HIM.

still I am grieved that I didn't have an answer when people told me Kent was disqualified, and should be disregarded.

I hope I did not misunderstand the comment.

still I am grieved that I didn't have an answer when people told me Kent was disqualified, and should be disregarded.

I am not well versed on what happened with Kent, and I would not speak ill of him. I too was very encouraged by his ministry.

In my opinion, even if a minister went totally off the deep end and became apostate (Not saying this happened with Kent. Just speaking hypothetically.) it would not mean that his ministry before that point is to be disregarded any more than a person who had a sordid and sinful past would be disqualified from future ministry because of it. Many men have had powerful ministries and have later fallen in one way or another. Their ministry up to that point was genuine and God ordained, and is still valuable for the purpose for which God called them. John Alexander Dowie (Late 1800/s, early 1900's) went seriously off the deep end, but to read many of his writings before that point is a great blessing and powerful ministry.

DoulosQuinn wrote:

still I am grieved that I didn't have an answer when people told me Kent was disqualified, and should be disregarded.

I was just basing this off your and twayneb's statement about how we shouldn't disregard someone disqualified. Maybe this is where they get that statement.

And again from someone who doesn't know him or his ministry, nothing has happened to him (or his wife) that God did not give permission to happen.

From looking around at his websites and other Christian sites, I desire to offer a warning for each of us...

When people will remember us (and we stand before God), what will be projected about us? Our argument (our belief's that we argue about ) or our love of Christ above all else. I think we should ponder this because it doesn't seem that they can be one and the same.

God bless you....

There has been something that has been going through my mind since I first read this.

Who asked you to defend Kent Hovind?

Did he, or his wife or children? Why do you feel as though you have to vindicate him?

Fact is you are trying to get the blind to see. They can't see. They won't see.

Do you need to go on wikipedia? Why?

Maybe what has happened to Kent Hovind was to teach both him and us a lesson.

Maybe it is his cross he has to bear.

But whatever the case, if you suppose you are going to change peoples minds, forget it.

It would be wiser to spend your time more profitably, in prayer, the word, encouraging the Hovind family by email if you wish.

It seems all the bias you are encountering is unnecessary.

It's up to you if you leave it alone or not, but the ball is in your court.

God bless.

enid wrote:

Maybe it is his cross he has to bear.

Blessings brethren,
I'm not aware of Hovind's situation either , in fact it is the first time i heard of him.
I just want to reply Lysa's response to twayneb's statement, because if the people that said that Hovind was disqualified, and should be disregarded, based their statement on Ezekiel 18:24, (the verse Lysa pointed out) then there is a wrong interpretation from this people of what this verse is really saying (I realize this goes a little off the main topic discussed here). But let me explain a bit what i understand this passage means. The Lord is saying that one should not think that if our first works were good we're going to remain saved no matter if our last works are unfaithful and evil. He emphasize that what we are and do now is what counts for our salvation, not what we were or did, and those past works are not going to be remembered by the Lord for our salvation or condemnation but “in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.”
The wrong interpretation of this verse is in believing that the Lord is saying that those works of righteousness done before in faith are no longer good or shouldn’t be remembered either, because they were His. The best example of what i'm intending to say here we can find it with Solomon's life. At the end he forsook the Lord's ways, but we still have his proverbs and the books of the Bible that he wrote inspired by the Holy Ghost, and they have power still, right? Because they where God's work trough Him. He separated himself from the Lord at the end, but what God did and revealed trough him, stayed and lasted. The risky problem here is when men focus on God's works and take of his eyes from God himself, then there's the danger of falling into idolatry of a man, or ministry or movement or anything God used or did in the past. This often can leave us without God's presence and much religion with dead works.
I'm not applying this to Mr. Hovind nor defending him either, as i said before, i know nothing about his ministry, i don't know if his ministry was a work of the Spirit or it wasn't, I pray that he may receive either the grievance or discipline with a humble heart.
Just wanted to clear out the meaning of this verse a bit. So please excuse my intromission on your discussion ;-)
God bless you all,
Karen