Posted on 07/23/2002 5:26:45 PM PDT by Charles Henrickson
Edited on 05/07/2004 8:12:57 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Those Ecumenical activists are hypocritical atheists who see the religion as a tool for power and social engineering. They are the same people who ruined Episcopalian Church and who wreck the public schools.
Catholics don't invite heathens to the "altar of Christ," though we do pray with Christians and non-Christians.
WIth all due respect to my Lutheran brethren (though, I'm sure they don't say the same about me), this dust-up looks political.
I do think it is not something to kick a man out of ministry over.
if you think inviting them to join you in prayer to "God" is adequate and acceptable . . .
I do.
if you think confirming idolaters in their unbelief and confusing the faithful is a nice thing to do . . .
I'm not doing that. I'm praying to God, and they're praying to God. And the faithful are only confused when some denomination makes a stink out of it, like this one.
if you think those things are a low priority item for the Christian church to be concerned about . . .
Near the bottom.
well, think again
If someone wants to pray with me, I will pray with him.
Osama bin Laden?
Would you kneel down beside that Muslim before the altar of God?
The First Commandment was and still is the most important commandment.
That's why it was first.
Martin Luther doesn't have to feel quite so bad about these folks using his name.
Would you kneel down beside that Muslim before the altar of God?
If it would lead to a bullet through the back of his head, yes.
And I do. But my Church teaches that men can be led to God by ways known only to Him. If your faith is weakened by praying with Jews or other non-Christians, then you shouldn't do it.
However, if I did, you wouldn't be on it.
There is a WORLD of difference between "praying with Jews" (whom I believe God holds in His hand and protects) and bowing down before the altar of Christ beside Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Harry Potter wiccans and other assorted pagans.
I've read your posts for years, and I believe, in your heart, you know that's true.
Discernment counts.
Regarding this issue, I feel we should ask ourselves, "What would Jesus have done?" He was roundly criticized by the Pharisees for consorting with "taxpayers and sinners" and yet he repeatedly stated through his actions and words that that was exactly where his ministry was intended to be.
Looks like we are seeing the modern day Pharisees in action with this decision to suspend Rev. Benke over abstract theological purity issues rather than ministering "unto the least of these"....
Huh? I don't think that verse made it into my Bible. Where is it in yours?
(And don't even get me started on who set whom up as a judge of another's "unsound doctrine" ...)
Jesus said, "I have come to call sinners to repentence." Show me how Benke, through his actions and words, called the sinners to repentance.
Jesus said, "I am the way and the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me." Show me how Benke, through his actions and words, clearly confessed the person and work of Christ and made plain that we come to God through Christ alone.
Looks like we are seeing the modern day Pharisees in action with this decision to suspend Rev. Benke over abstract theological purity issues rather than ministering "unto the least of these"....
Explain to me how affirming the ministrations of pagan clerics and letting their followers remain secure in their empty, hope-less religions that cannot give them forgiveness for their sins or save them from death--explain to me how that is an "abstract theological purity issue."
What is wrong with having a 1) Christian and 2) Lutheran perspective represented? How is our denominational "purity" harmed by his presence there? I don't have the text of Benke's comments/prayer but I'm sure it contained nothing but uplifting Christian sentiments that flowed straight from the Gospel. I just don't get the extreme conservatism on this one, but then I'm "just" a layperson. Maybe you can convince me otherwise. We are having a former President of Ft Wayne Seminary present to our congregation next week about this issue and I will keep an open mind.... But for now I just don't get this fear of "mixing" with other faiths.
As an addendum to my earlier response, I agree that if this is what he had done it would have been wrong and harmful. However, I disagree that by participating in this event that he affirmed the "ministrations of pagan clerics"; to the contrary, he showed the gospel to be in stark contrast to the hopeless and bizarre Hindu, Sikh, etc. proclamations. Thereby perhaps enlightening some who would not otherwise have been reached. Should we abandon the stage to the pagans? Or try to stand in stark contrast to them in the same arena?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.