Did Joel Olsteen lose his church in Texas?

1. The simple answer: Lakewood still stands and Osteen still leads

After a February 2024 shooting at Lakewood Church, Joel Osteen-led services and public healing events resumed at the Houston megachurch, and reporting describes Osteen preaching to large weekly crowds as the senior pastor of the facility housed in the former Compaq Center, with no reporting in the provided sources that he lost control, ownership, or leadership of the church ^{[2] [1] [3]}.

2. Why the “lost the church” claim would be plausible to some readers — and why it’s wrong here

The idea that a high-profile pastor “lost” his church can arise when controversies, financial trouble, or security incidents dominate coverage, and Lakewood has been prominent in all three arenas: the church publicly announced paying off a roughly $100 million renovation loan, and the scale and visibility of Lakewood invite scrutiny about wealth and governance ^[1]. But none of the supplied reporting or institutional sources document any transfer of ownership, forced removal of Osteen, or legal judgment stripping him of leadership; instead journalists describe Lakewood’s continued operations and Osteen’s visible role after the shooting ^{[1] [2]}.

3. The February 2024 shooting: trauma, not a change in ownership

Multiple outlets reported that a woman opened fire inside Lakewood in February 2024, was killed by security, and that the church later hosted services of “healing and restoration,” with Osteen and staff addressing the trauma and welcoming worshippers back—coverage that frames the incident as a security and community crisis rather than any institutional collapse or loss of the church by its pastor ^{[4] [2] [5]}.

4. Financial and institutional context that fuels narratives about control

Lakewood’s scale—described as the largest church in Texas and one of the biggest U.S. megachurches—plus publicity around paying off a multidecade renovation loan contributes to public fascination and critique of Osteen’s wealth and the church’s budgetary footprint; reporting notes a $100 million loan recently retired and estimates of substantial operating expenses, but those financial facts in the sources are presented as context, not evidence of leadership change ^[1].

5. Alternative viewpoints and the critics’ angle

Critics of Osteen’s style and theology—who label his messages as prosperity gospel or insufficiently rooted in scripture—have long shaped how stories about Lakewood are read, and that critique amplifies appetite for dramatic narratives about downfall ^[6]. Those perspectives are present in the record: observers and some journalists frame Osteen’s prominence and wealth as elements of broader theological critique, but the supplied reporting does not connect those criticisms to any loss of the church itself ^{[6] [7]}.

6. What the available reporting does not show (and why that matters)

The sources provided offer consistent reporting that Lakewood remains active under Osteen’s leadership and that the church managed a major loan payoff and a recovery after a shooting ^{[1] [2]}. They do not include legal filings, property transfers, denominational votes, or authoritative documents that would substantiate a claim that Osteen “lost” the church, and absent such records in the material supplied, asserting a loss would be unsupported by the available evidence ^{[3] [8]}.

7. Bottom line — accountable, evidence-based conclusion

Based on the reporting available here, Joel Osteen did not lose Lakewood Church in Texas; he continues as senior pastor of an operating megachurch that has publicly announced financial milestones and returned to worship after a violent incident, while ongoing debate about his theology and the church’s wealth remains a separate public thread rather than proof of institutional dispossession ^{[1] [2] [6]}.