Posted on 01/31/2013 7:01:05 PM PST by Heart-Rest
No, I knew you were being snarky. Billy Graham set up a “cottage industry” selling books, doing revivals etc. should we impugn his beliefs? The 700 Club isn’t just a “cottage industry” it’s a media giant, should we snark all over Pat Roberts?
Thank you, Heart-Rest, for the post and ping.
You’re obviously defensive and overly sensitive about your Catholicism. Might I suggest a focus on Jesus and not on your membership card. This is probably why you are bringing in other ministries as a diversion, a focus on groups and clubs and denominations made by man. Besides, there are other absurdities about those anaologies but I won’t bother with.
Which is the point, a focus on man’s creations. Any Presbyterian pastor who has a dramatic “conversion” to Catholicism, or any other part of Christendom for that matter, is problematic because as a Pres Pastor he should have already been a Christian, making a jump to somewhere else merely a transfer and not some life changing issue.
Now if he only found Christ in the Catholic church, and was indeed a poseur as a Presbyterian Pastor (quite possible), then this dramatic life changing experience should be about Christ and not about Rome. This defensiveness about the big C has just never ever really comported with my knowledge of the big J.
In fact, with regard to that, might I suggest the Book of Revelation, the 7 letters to the 7 Churches.
Actually, the splinters you are talking about have absolutely nothing to do with real faith and a real relationship with Jesus, and all to do with interchurch and intrachurch spats. And this is my entire point, none of those splinters deserves equality with the miracle of being born again. No transition does. And if these details are what you remember from Lewis' work, then you sadly missed the main goal of Lewis' life work.
I have to work now, but will take the time this evening to explain why you’re wrong.
I’ll look forward to it, but you’re talking to a home school dad and CS Lewis was a major force in our three kids’ education. I am also a born again Christian who had to come out of organized religion to find faith. I cannot possibly see where you are going with this, but I’ll keep an eye out....
Because we are told to.
“Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” John 7:24
The Greek word for judge is “krino” and it means “to call into question”. This is what Jesus means when He says “judge with righteous judgment”. We are to call into question the unbiblical actions of individuals and discern for ourselves whether or not to follow such a person.
I Corinthians 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
"Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?" (I Cor. 6:1-5)
LOL!!! My thought's exactly. How many years have we seen these posts?
It's enought to make you want to become a Catholic just to cash in. :O)
Bear, I agree we are called to judge at times - however - in this case, I was just commenting rather flippantly. That flippant observation is that if a Presbyterian Pastor underwent something this dramatic involving another denomination, church, etc, then something is askew with his faith at some point.
And wow, did it strike a nerve, which in and of itself is instructive.
Matthew 24:24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect--if that were possible.
I’ve known a good number of Presbyterian Pastors in my life, and those from PCA are Bible believing Christians, those from PC-USA? Well, not necessarily.
Regardless of one's denomination (or lack thereof) I suspect that most believing Christians will agree that morality is objective and there are clear distinctions between that which is right and that which is wrong. That very belief presupposes "rules" however, and attempts to codify them tend to engender disagreement. This is, I believe, a natural, if not inevitable result of imperfect humans trying their best to interpret a perfect Divine Will; we're going to make mistakes. If we got it right every time, we would have perfect knowledge of God's Will, which no single human can possibly have. Yet, sincere Christians, despite dogmatic differences will embrace specific beliefs, attitudes and consequently practices as their means of expressing their faith. Failing to do so would be "giving up," in an effort to know God.
Indeed you yourself, felt it necessary to, for the context of this conversation, identify and define yourself by (some of) the outward actions you have taken as the result of your beliefs:
"...you’re talking to a home school dad and CS Lewis was a major force in our three kids’ education..."
Certainly those actions reflect your values, and presumably you mentioned them to me because you expect me to recognize some particular virtue in them. It is apparent that to you, those actions are an extension or manifestation of your belief system or your faith.
Guess what? A denomination is, for all intents and purposes a group of folks of like values who have decided to do the exact same thing, i.e., manifest their beliefs in their actions. You say this has, "absolutely nothing to do with real faith and a real relationship with Jesus." Yet, for serious practitioners of any Christian denomination, it has everything to do with their faith and real relationship with Jesus.
Don't get me wrong, there are many self-proclaimed Christians in every denomination and non-denominational community who pay lip service to their faith, and worse, those who hypocritically hold and act on beliefs in direct opposition to those they profess. Yet, for those who genuinely seek to know Christ, their choice of community is a very deliberate, conscious and spiritual decision, made with every intention of building a closer tie to the Savior. Cynically speaking, history is replete with examples of persons who have aligned with one denomination over another to further their personal agendas and enhance their personal power or prestige or to exploit others. Clearly they miss the point of Christianity.
For the seriously committed, whether one is receiving the Eucharist in St. Patrick's Cathedral firmly believing that they are receiving the blood and body of Christ, or those juggling snakes in a remote Appalachian Pentecostal church, the actions that define a denomination are merely external expressions of deeply intimate and internalized beliefs.
Now, to the concept of, "conversion." I suppose for some people, perhaps for many, conversion might be a matter of convenience, political expedience, or just trying to fit in. For others, however, it is a profound, life altering transformation. Whether it is from one denomination to another within the Christian profession, or from something entirely outside of it, it may happen in a flash, with a proverbial "Road to Damascus" experience, or it may be the end of a long, spiritually arduous journey. In either case, the surrendering of one's way of life to embrace another is a profound decision. An atheist who becomes a Christian may be likened to a traveler getting on a whole new road. I would liken Hahn to somebody who stayed on the same general path, but changed horses. In either case, both persons have made conscious decisions and implemented those changes they came to believe were necessary for them to get where they needed to go.
I'm in no position to begrudge either man their choice or their reasons, as I know that for me personally, I can not envision changing either my road or my horse, and anything that would prompt me to do either would be of such profound, immense and overwhelming power, that it would have to seem to me as though God himself were redirecting me.
That was a long and winding road and not relevant to my point, which was, and remains, that what CSL was talking about and what Hahn is talking about are not close to the same thing.
And FTR, I only mentioned the homeschooling for a single context, which is that I was very familiar with CSL, even if not the particular book you mentioned. period.
So in summary, you're telling me that you know what Lewis meant when he discussed conversion because you're a Lewis expert, even though you've never read the seminal work and his spiritual autobiography which has as its very thematic core, his conversion.
Gotcha.
The Great Divorce and Mere Christianity are widely considered his greatest works, and most list of the top ten Lewis works don’t even include the book you are talking about. (I just checked a few of them). All of this to say that I am acqainted enough with Lewis to say, yes, 100 per cent, that what he wrote about has zip zero nada to do with a switch from Presbyterian to Catholic. Yes, I am sure of that.
You have a very big problem understanding the differene between religion and faith. I mean, I doubt you even know what that means, Wormwood.
It has everything to do with transforming one's most deeply held beliefs.
"You have a very big problem understanding the differene (sic) between religion and faith. I mean, I doubt you even know what that means, Wormwood.
And I would suggest you have a very big problem with making assumptions about others that are completely off the mark. But I do always find it charming when those who condescend and flout their *intellect* make spelling errors when doing so.
Well you have two concepts completely bass ackwards in your mind.
First, if you think that conversion to Christianity is merely a “strongly held belief,” then that is definitive. You clearly, and I mean very clearly, do not understand the fundamental truth that is above and beyond all other beliefs, strongly held or otherwise.
And second, if you think typo’s and intellect are related, then you have never had a brain that outpaced your typing.....
Gotcha. Twice.
Once again you make erroneous presumptions and bear false witness. I know that the "fundamental truths" I hold bear a pretty strong proscription about that. Perhaps yours are different. "And second, if you think typo’s and intellect are related, then you have never had a brain that outpaced your typing....."
Not directly related, but certainly, when I want to be taken seriously, I have enough courtesy and respect for those I'm trying to communicate with to check my presentation. Apparently that is not a concern of yours.
**and I have been the only accurate one.**
According to whom?
Have you read Hahn’s book, Rome Sweet Home?
If you haven’t, I would suggest that you do so that you can speak about the facts clearly.
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.