Ebony you asked a few questions on the other thread and so to avoid further thread jackeration, I moved it over here.
First of all, I have a difficult time discussing these issues without knowing what the others fundamental beliefs are so if I may ask:
Are you a Christian? Do you believe Christianity is the 'correct' religion, or one of the 'correct' religions? Do you routinely attend a 'black' church and if so, do you routinely 'give'?
All of those questions are important (for anyone in the convo) because they define the context of your position.
For example, I will and always argue that a non-christian has no ability to debate Christian doctrine, IE a non-christian cannot critique what he disbelieves fundamental from an internal perspective. So for example, if someone Creflo Dollar is utilizing a perspective on Christian doctrine that tells him 'this is how prosperity occurs doctrinally' the non-christian can not critique his doctrinal position as the disbelieve in general the bible and Christ. In other words disbelievers have no logical ground to internally critique what a pastor believes or disbelieves his theological position should be in regard to Christianity.
Put it a different way, I can not tell Louis Farrakhan that he is a bad Muslim, when I am A) not Muslim and B) I disbeliever in the text (Koran) in which he professes to operate his beliefs.
However, they folks may be very well logically grounded in critiquing Christianity externally and individually. In this scenario, if I say Christ is about love and love represents this, and I do not follow what I profess, then you can indeed say I am not following what "I SAY" I believe. This is no different than in any other statement of behavior. But this form of critique has nothing to do with Christianity themselves. It is individually based critique of I SAID but I DIDN'T DO.
The broader external critiques are apologetical, or impactful. In the apologetical critique of Christianity or any religion what you are doing is arguing that the religion is incorrect in and of itself. So like most folks do in here they say that Christianity is not the correct religion for x,y,z reasons in the first place. An impact critique is more along the lines you may believe that, but it is having these negative (perceived) impacts. IE You believe the preacher when he says this leads to prosperity, but yet you do what he says and you are still broke, etc. This has no bearing on doctrine, it is simply a cause and effect based argument.
In a nutshell, you can't tell me that I am or am not following the bible right, but you can tell me the bible is not true, or tell me that my following of things I believe is not leading to the results that I say it should.
Which brings us to the black church.