Posted on 04/02/2015 11:56:13 AM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
Whoa!
Ol’ Joe wasn’t that big in the preview!
“Tozer... helpful...”
Interesting. Psalm 118: 8 applies to Tozer.
Tozer taught that there can be no spiritual regeneration until there has been a moral reformation. Tozer clearly states that a person’s salvation is conditioned upon one’s intention to reform. (”The Best of A.W. Tozer”, book 2 pg 115 - 117.)
A very Catholic concept! And - Tozer read and was influenced by several of the great Catholic mystics.
Tozer taught that a person must reform their life in order to trust Christ which is a form of the dreaded works salvation.
Tozer thinks like a Catholic.
I agree. Just skimming through many posts on this thread ... well, there’s a lot of ugliness spewing forth on Good Friday for a decent man.
So you found one quote you like and now own him as a Catholic?
What a joke.
Since Tozer is no longer alive to ask about his comment, then we are left to hash it out.
There cannot even be intent to reform unless the Spirit of God puts it in a person’s heart. And that’s called *repentance*.
The Pharisees were morally upright and inwardly corrupt and unsaved, while the tax collectors and prostitutes came to Jesus first and then got saved and their lives were changed.
If Tozer actually meant what you are implying, then I disagree with him on that for the reasons above.
Nevertheless, that does not mean that Tozer *thinks like a Catholic* nor does that mean that I don’t find the rest of his stuff helpful.
I don’t agree with everyone on every point of doctrine.
FWIW, one of your Catholic compatriots keyworded some of the Tozer threads with *catholicbashing* so y’all need to decide if he’s Catholic in his thinking or a Catholic basher.
Have you read the rest of his stuff? Or just that one quote you like?
No, I really don’t know that much about Mr. Schuller other than he was a friend of HHH and lost the cathedral in a financial decline.
Having reviewed the previous posts, I can say I knew nothing really about Schuller “theology”. It is apostate.
The quotes provided in the original post were just the tip of the iceberg.
You're the tail wagging the dog. It's that some Catholics think like Tozer when it comes to sound, biblical doctrine.
The message was very simple: The way to serve God is to be the great person god wants you to be. Simple.
Robert Schuller: I hope you don't preach this, I hope you don't preach this!
MH: What, the texts?
RS: No, what you just spoke into the microphone right now. I hope you don't because you could do a lot of damage to a lot of beautiful people. But maybe if you preach it, maybe you will demonstrate your knowledge of human relationships and maybe you'll demonstrate a sensitivity of caring about these pathetic, pathetic people that are so lost in pain and suffering because of their sinful condition, and I think you'd want to save them. I think you'd want to bring them to Jesus. And so if you preach that text, oh man, I sure hope you give it the kind of interpretation that I do or, I'll tell you, you'll drive them farther away and they'll be madder than hell at you and they'll turn the Bible off, and they'll switch you off, and they'll turn on the rock music and Madonna. Just because it's in the Bible doesn't mean you should preach it. And if you do, you have to say, "Who's listening to me? Will they understand? And will the love of Jesus come through my words and through my message; through my personality. Will it come through my spirit? Will I come across as a humble person or will I come across as a person who's kind of mean and know-it-all: I've got the answers and when people like Schuller come along, they're heretics! Be careful, it is so difficult to preach some of those texts and not come across as lacking humility...
I don't think so...he was ignorant of the truth because he had been taught otherwise by those Prottys that he trusted to be teaching truth (they weren't)
Luther, on the other hand, knew the truth, had been taught by those who only taught the truth, and decided that he knew better than they did as to what Christ founded as Christianity (he didn't)...
It appears like Osteen picked up the mantle...
https://www.google.com/search?q=osteen+books&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7ADRA_enUS475&gws_rd=ssl
Just think; a few hundred years ago he could have ONLY been following the Catholics.
He sure would have stayed out of trouble by emulating THEIR example!!
Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.[1]
Pope John XII (955–964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.
Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who "sold" the Papacy
Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante's Divine Comedy
Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.[2]
Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.[3]
Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors' reserves on a single ceremony[4]
Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
Robert Schuller was a son of satan. My understanding from older folks in Northwest Iowa is that he was booted from the Reformed Churches in the midwest because of errant teachings. Instead of repenting, he took his “strange fire” to California and found itching ears.
Bump
I fell in to a burning ring of fire...Johnny Cash
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.