Posted on 05/18/2006 7:43:02 PM PDT by Quix
PROPOSALS INVITED TOWARD A MORE CIVIL DISCOURSE RE RELIGIOUS FIGURES AT ODDS WITH VARIOUS SENSIBILITIES
The current thread regarding Pat Robertson is but the latest in a long tradition of certain flavors of evangelical Christian and particularly Pentecostal/Charismatic religious figures being thoroughly shredded by what--90% or more of the posts--usually in the harshest, most hostile, even demonizing wording possible.
It seems that when folks are perceived to be in such Pentecostal/charismatic categories, all bets are off, no holds barred--the most viscious attacks are the minimal Standard Operating Procedure. Instead of exhorting one another in Christian Love, the worst attitudes normally evidenced in the most ruthless of groups seems to flood out from many corners of the forum.
The forum rules about personal attacks are thrown to the wind--usually with great cheered-on fervor.
Personally, I don't mind the likes of Shrillery getting thoroughly castigated. They are the evil--even truly satanic opponents to everything this forum stands for. Ditto for the Jihadis. I think on that, all conservatives would readily agree or near agree.
However, when it comes to religious figures, there tends to be great haughty hostility to those not seen as kosher enough--and too often--for all those not members of one's own tidy little group.
We can ALL feel DUTY BOUND to "set folks Bibllically straight" regarding the horrible demonic errors of this or that figure. And, Pentecostals/charismatics usually make easy targets because we say things that are very uncommon in other corners of Christianity--though, interestingly, not at all uncommon in the New Testament Church.
But, from our perspective, we could say the same thing about John McArthur, for example. Or Dave Hunt.
Each homogenic group could come up with a list of popular religious figures from other groups that the first group considered evil and beyond the pale.
Then there's the great hostility between the RC's and the Protestants.
IF WE ARE REALLY SERIOUS ABOUT ACTING LIKE JESUS--THERE MUST BE A BETTER WAY to handle such perspectives. What are your proposals?
It's not up to the beleagured Religion Moderator. And Dear JimRob has been driven to distractions more than a few times and probably wished there was some way to send the whole religion forum into a black hole for good.
It seems to me that if we cannot police ourselves better on this score, that we may well not deserve to call ourselves CHRIST-LIKE = CHRISTIAN.
-----------------------------------------
I'm not suggesting that we ought not be allowed to state sincerely held perspectives which question another's stance as being Biblical enough or full of enough integrity or lacking in duplicity etc. We ought still be able to articulate what we perceive to be true and particularly Biblicly true vs UnBiblical.
But doing so so outrageously and in such devilish terms ought to stop and stop cold. PARTICULARLY ABOUT THINGS WITH REGARD TO WHICH THERE IS BIBLICAL ROOM TO DISAGREE, TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE PERSPECTIVE. I am not talking about the Virgin Birth, The Resurrection etc.
But we ought to have some mutually agreed upon minimal Christian standard for doing so. And we ought to police ourselves as well as lovingly each other.
-----------------------------------------------
Personally, my proposal would be
1. that things such as calling another religious figure a demonized, satanic, etc individual needs to be limited to VERY OVERT DEMONSTRATIONS OF CLEARLY DEMONIC BEHAVIORS AND STATEMENTS. That is, demonized behaviors common in the NT. Statements clearly and overtly blasphemous in starkly brazen and obvious terms--not interpreted, rationalized terms on the part of the hearer.
2. that naysayers from outside the normal Christian community--those hostile to the whole idea of Christianity and all the more so to anything remotely supernaturally Christian--that those sorts of hostile naysayers be soundly, persistently and totally discouraged from getting away with their viscious, demeaning, virulant rants.
3. That once the more strident of us have stated our perspective regarding a particular religious figure--especially 2-3 times--we would do well to let it rest and avoid ranting on and on and on and on for dozens of strident redundant posts.
4. IF WE CAN PUT THINGS tenatively and graciously, OK--perhaps a longer discourse would be warranted or merited. Graciousness deserves something extra in the religion forum! But the haughty, self-righteous-from Mt Sinai sorts of castigating-of-all-not-our-idea-not-our-tidy-little-box--that needs to go and go quickly.
5. Those failing to follow through with such guidelines might voluntarily or even at Mod's requirement take themselves out of the next X or XX such threads. Or perhaps they would be prevented/ordered to avoid all further threads on such a topic.
---------------------------
I'm happy to consider other reasonable alternatives. I'm just groping to try and find a workable, functional way which
1. Allows reasonable discourse and a mutually respectful sharing of all perspectives on a topic and even on a personage.
2. Demonstrates MUCH, MUCH, MUCH MORE of the unity of spirit and mutual charity which Christ called HIS FOLLOWERS to.
3. Prevents virtually every thread that involves Pentecostal/Charismatic figures and topics from becoming a bloody shredding fest ALWAYS at the expense of those of that perspective.
4. Brings glory to God instead of such a tarnished bad taste in everyone's mouths because of the awful behavior of God's snotty nosed kids.
Remember the flood of vicious vitriol after Kenneth E. Hagin's going home? Instead of tributes? The Holy Ghost lives within you. Do you feel His presence here? Or, is this a whitewashed tomb, Quix?
However, when it comes to religious figures, there tends to be great haughty hostility to those not seen as kosher enough--and too often--for all those not members of one's own tidy little group.
His point isn't to have an article posted under "Devotional." His point is to encourage gracious discourse when it comes to Christian leaders who practice their faith differently from you.
We really do need to stop the knee-jerk hatred toward high-profile Christian leaders.
Are Freepers being influenced unduly by TV sitcoms, that mock high-profile Christians? Are we being influenced by the MSM that mocks them? We can do better than that.
You've lived in Hampton Roads for almost four decades. That's fine. But I went to the university he founded, and worked for some three years at CBN and CBN-affiliated organizations. I know enough about him to know that you are absolutely wrong, influenced by the same media that ridicule other Christian leaders. Read my bio for my take on Pat.
I was telling of the new mod's stated position about "devotional" threads.
That would provide SOME relief from the constant bickering on normal threads. I don't think you'll get away from that. Just my opinion, of course, but I think denominationalism and a host of personal issues further the bickering.
I just looked at your FReeper page. Thanks for what you have posted about Pat Robertson, glad to see that it's balanced.
I agree that Pat is a grandfatherly man who has a heart to help people and to shed the light of the gospel at home and abroad.
You make a good point when you say that he helps more people in a day than most of us help in a lifetime.
jm
I see you were active in “Operation Blessing”. A real money maker for Pat.
Probably plenty of truth in that.
However, as God told the prophet . . . there are yet many (even lurkers) who have not bowed to baal.
HS must be within us in this era, for sure.
Thanks for yoru kind reply.
My own discernment and the report of folks who have worked face to face with Pat is quite different from your perspective. I think I trust their report more as I know them and their discernment more.
And, it appears, feels to me like your perspective may well have some strong bias coloring it.
I think it's basically ego and the heart of man, Theo.
I felt long ago when I was asking God about all the denominational splits . . . that His reply was that it had nothing to do with theology--that the theological justifications and rationalizations were ego driven excuses for pride/relationship/psychology issues between the bretheren involved at the time.
I've observed since then, that in virtually every church conflict etc. I've been around, that was the case.
Thanks tons. I love first hand experience, face to face facts.
I think if personal psychology stuff--usually pride, turf issues, control issues--were not a factor, the denominational issues could take their proper lesser place with graciousness and brotherly love.
I think it CAN be done. Else Holy Spirit and Christ's example are too week for FR's brand of sins? I don't think so. But we must be willing to doggedly put Christ and His values and priorities first above our biases and ego driven junk. I'm not overly optimistic--unless we could have another category of more or less protected GRACIOUS DISCOURSE type threads.
There's something in the heart of man that 'glories' in:
"--There--take that--you ignorant unlearned serf. About time you recognized the truly truest true truth from MY hand and keyboard! Harumph."
We each have to recognize such stuff from the pit and reject, renounce it and choose Christ's Love and graciousness over it--persistently, doggedly--OVERCOMINGLY.
imho.
I see you were active in “Operation Blessing”. A real money maker for Pat.
- - -
You are absolutely wrong. And I think you owe Pat an apology and The Lord some repentance.
OPERATION BLESSING IS 100% DELIVERED TO THE NEEDY END USERS.
Pat's organization covers the overhead and delivers 100% of the Operation Blessing donations to the end user.
You could not have been MORE WRONG.
Praise God for your Wisdom and Faithfulness and tireless labors in our behalf and in behalf of The Kingdom.
Would you be willing to please spell out for my sometimes muddled mined specifically and clearly what sort of thread you'd feel fitting to be under such a label as:
"CHARISMATIC DEVOTIONAL THREAD"
You don't seem to know much about civility.
Not to mention you are completely wrong about Operation Blessing. That money is ALL used for the needy. Every penny of it.
If you can't show civility, please go away.
ping to #33
I've thought of how to label a discussion thread as a denomination only thread, but it bogs down at the admin level. Someone would have to keep an eye on it.
My own sense, though, when I approach almost any obviously denominational thread is to participate minimally unless the title of the thread is worded negatively toward others.
For Example: "Rostarians Uber Alles....9 million Protestants realize the truth and covert to the real religion"
That kind of title is an invitation to contribute a few carefully selected words.
RM, could you please take a look at post 27?
Seems to me the poster is doing the very thing we were trying to avoid.
thanks,
jm
RM, I am sorry, but Operation Blessing, one of CBN's outreach ministries, has public records showing that the funding IS given to the needy, not pocketed by Pat Robertson. I am not comfortable with him being falsely accused of such.
jm
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.