| Author |
Message |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 952
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 2:01 pm: |     |
I did not know that P C, and D were modalists. I do know that T.D. Jakes is a modalist, and that is why I so vigorously objected when Bill Hybels Willow Creek knowingly invited him to speak to some 40,000 people, and then Dr. Warren quoting approvingly of him in that pew forum transcript. Frankly, that bothers me a whole lot more than the music of P,C, and D which you may be surprised to know, that I actually like, but of course I will not be buying now that I know this.
Stan |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1156
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 2:06 pm: | |
Hannah, the trinity is hard to comprehend in our minds as we have nothing to compare it to, but modalism takes that and turns it on end. It is very complex to me to explain in simple terms, but it seems to me that they make God have split personalities. And anyone with greater comprehension and explanation can correct me...
So, if God the father is the active personality, the other two are background. So, I question if that means when Christ died, and was in the tomb, was there no active God on earth? And I don't know how they can explain the holy spirit working in everyone's lives all the time and yet not have the father and son too. I hate to even try to explain it too much because I'm so confused about it...but I know it is a long way from orthodox. |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1157
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 2:23 pm: | |
Now, I did not know TDJakes was modalist. But it ties in perfectly with my question ... how far does guilt by association run? Can we know for sure who does and doesn't know that about TDJakes or PCD? And if someone knows, but still agrees with something someone says, can we not say so? Hallmark does a line of cards with his quotes too, and he includes very uplifting scripture verses in some of his writings that they put on cards. If that's your only exposure to him, it would be so easy to think him just another Christian pastor. If I hadn't heard Hank Hanegraff playing clips of his sermons, I've never listened to him personally, I wouldn't know.
Currently, he has an incredibly successful outreach ministry to battered women...he is applauded for his efforts to protect those women then help move them out of the circumstances. Because I admire what he is doing for women in abusive situations, am I endorsing everything he does? I already have a hard time enjoying PCD music because of what I might be considered endorsing by association. Is there an easy "right" response, always, for everyone? |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 953
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 2:40 pm: | |
Hannah, It looks like we were posting at the same time, so I didn't see your post that does bring up very good points. I agree with you that there are many fine Christians in both SDA and RCC, as it is possible, even in these legalistic systems, to hear the true gospel. Also, God, in His awesome sovereignty is not limited in His power to save people because they are in false systems. But as Chris's parable suggests so well, the Captain wants to rescue us from the darkness and chains of the hold-dweller.
A little over 2 weeks ago, a member of our FAF Bible study gave me a CD by John MacArthur which I mentioned previously, and made a free offer to send to anyone on this forum who asks. Now, I don't agree with everything MacArthur teaches, but where he agrees with the Bible, and the plain testimony of history, then he speaks very powerfully. This CD is an absolute stunner when it comes to documenting the undeniable history of RCC, and there CURRENT doctrine which is the clearest denial of the gospel that there is. He details what the high stakes are in this RCC-evangelical debate. Do we just assume that RCC people are Christians? Do we overturn centuries of martyrdom and faithful evangelical sacrifice? Do we overturn what Luther, Calvin, Spurgeon, and so many others have affirmed about the very heart of the gospel, and the truth that we as former SDAs affirm so clearly, and that is that our works contribute absolutely nothing to our salvation?
You have to go back in the last archived section where Heretic quoted directly from Rick Warren's own words where he clearly put down the first Reformation as being about creeds instead of deeds! That is so insulting to all of the martyrs and Reformers who gave their very lives so that we could all rejoice in our salvation by grace alone through faith alone. And now Warren wants to join evangelicals, modalists, (like T.D. Jakes), and Catholics to form this massive humanitarian relief effort which he calls a Global Peace Plan. This is what he calls the second Reformation based on good works! Does this idea bother anyone? Or maybe I am just guilty of overstatement? I welcome anyone else's opinion on this.
Stan |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 954
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 2:55 pm: | |
Here is a link to the CRI website documenting the heretical positions of T.D. Jakes. It goes beyond modalism, but includes the false health and wealth gospel. He even is quoted as saying "I am the power and the glory..." in a Wall Street journal article. www.equip.org/free/DJ900.htm
Stan |
Windmotion
Registered user
Username: Windmotion
Post Number: 220
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 3:33 pm: | |
Stan,
It's not that I think people like T.D. Jakes and Catholics etc. aren't wrong. I do! But I'm not sure if shunning them becuase we disagree is the best way to go about it.
As far as Rick Warren, I suspect his push is based on "every action results in an equal and opposite reaction." Because the world sees Christians as being so split apart and argumentative an announcement like this is needed to let people know anything is changing at all. It wouldn't surprise me if what actually happens is more mainstream.
Harmoniously,
Hannah |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1160
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 1:58 pm: | |
I agree, Hannah. If you look at RW's church's website, there is a FAQ about catholicism vs. Christianity. He dismisses maryology and pergatory and "other doctrines" as false, but mentions a few areas where at least in lip service, the beliefs are the same. I know people who got saved while Catholic, and in the Catholic church by the same gospel we know. Granted, they eventually left as they came to understand scripture more, but we can't dismiss all catholics any more than we can dismiss all adventists. I'm not sure I'd use some of the terminology he has used here and there, but I can't hold to some phrases and dismiss other things I've heard him say, which we'd all agree with. So, he's not perfect. And maybe he still has some growing to do?? God's grace is sufficient for that. If I ever read him disparaging the gospel directly, and not merely guilt by association, I'd disappointedly have to acknowledge what many already seem to have convicted him of. But I haven't seen it yet.
Like you, I prefer unity to division.
(Message edited by melissa on October 27, 2005) |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 956
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 3:11 pm: | |
Thanks for your responses Hannah and Melissa. I don't claim to have all the answers either, but I think we need to ask ourselves some important questions. I agree we should not shun anyone in any false religious system, because we as Christians are commanded to preach the gospel to the whole world. However, where do you draw the line at fellowship? That is a huge difference. What if it is true (which I have heard that even Mormons come to Warren's church growth seminars and of course Catholic "priests" also come), then would anyone have a problem with that? There was a Global Day of Prayer when evangelicals of all stripes,(not just Warren) had prayer and fellowship with T.D. Jakes on stage in Dallas on May 15, 2005. Does that at least make anyone uncomfortable that a documented Modalist and Health and Wealth preacher would be so warmly accepted as a fellow brother?
As MacArthur said on this tape that I referred to, the Reformers and Charles Spurgeon always believed that the papacy was anti-christ. Spurgeon said that we are to pray against it as if it were the Devil himself. These ideas were not original to Ellen White. This is what the true Christian church has always believed and taught until recently when we now see such unbelievable compromise with this different gospel. Also this current evangelical church will never identify SDAs as a false system.
But if the Reformers and Spurgeon are right about the possibility of the Pope being the anti-christ, then if I believe in that prophetic possibility, then frankly my ears perk up when I hear about a massive Global Peace Plan in unity with the Catholic church? Or maybe I am just overly concerned.
Stan |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 1954
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 5:12 pm: | |
It appears to me that if each person prays about what God wants them to do, He will tell each of us what to be involved in and what not to do. There are God loving people in many churches and when they are in a cult like church I pray for them. I do not like their church structure or their unbiblibal doctrine, but I will associate with them if is is something I can conscientiously do, after I pray about it.
Just my two cents worth.
Diana |
Heretic
Registered user
Username: Heretic
Post Number: 211
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 9:36 pm: | |
Stan, thank you for sending me the CD you have been referring to. It was incredibly enlightening, straightforward, and undeniable. MacArthur pulls no punches but sometimes you just need the straight truth, especially about something so important, where the stakes are so high. I hope that more people will take you up on your offer to provide them the CD.
When the history is laid out so plainly, when the words of the Reformers are read as well as those of the different popes and councils, it becomes clear what damnable heresies make up the Catholic church. This includes it's unbiblical, false system of popes, bishops, priests, and other idol worship, and it's cursings (and murders) against those who dare challenge the authority of Rome, particularly those who have dared to proclaim that righteousness is by faith alone. My hackles go up when statements are made which minimize the Reformation and comments are made such as... "Well, I'm not as far apart from these guys [Catholics] as I thought I was, you know?". Hello? Compromise, anyone? Whether it was intentional or not it amounts to a betrayal of those who were martyred for the cause of Christ. No, I don't believe we should shun anyone either but evil, false religions of any stripe should be fought and exposed for what they are, particularly those who are sworn enemies of the true gospel.
Heretic
|
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 2820
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 11:06 pm: | |
Heretic, you have expressed what I have thought since leaving Adventism and beginning to see it clearly. I remember quite distinctly realizing, eventually, that Catholicism was as much a "cult" as was Adventism--in fact, they were similar in many ways.
While not everyone is called to be an apologist, still I'm convicted of the necessity of insisting on keeping the gospel pure, as Paul continually insisted.
Paul loved the Galatians and the Colossians and the Romans, yet he still spoke against the gnostic and Jewish assaults on the gospel of God's grace.
While I believe we must have the love and yearning of Jesus in our hearts for those who do not know Him, and while I believe we are called to love them for Him, still I believe we must be very clear about the distortions that keep them in bondage. Just as we were called out of Adventism, honest-hearted Catholics also are being called out of their spiritual confusion.
Just as we are often frustrated when Christians imply that we are being divisive by insisting Adventism is not truly Christian, so we must not insist that Catholicism is just another Christian denomination. There are true God-honoring people within that church, but we must not excuse the Catholic heresies as we reach out to Catholics. Just as we needed to discover the truth about our SDA heritage, so they need to understand the contrast of Jesus with Catholicism.
We can't excuse heresy for the sake of including our brothers in Christ. We must be clear and uncompromising of the gospel at the same time we are loving to those who are still in confusion.
Colleen |
Heretic
Registered user
Username: Heretic
Post Number: 212
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 11:32 pm: | |
Colleen, beutifully stated. You put my thoughts into words better than I could ever dream of. Thanks. 
Heretic |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1032
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 7:41 am: | |
Okay, now you have piqued my interest in the John McArthur CD. Stan, can I find this message online somewhere? If not I would be interested in obtaining a copy through you.
Chris Lee
ambulater@neb.rr.com
|
Brian3
Registered user
Username: Brian3
Post Number: 20
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 7:50 am: | |
ME2 |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1161
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 10:16 am: | |
I do not dispute that history has frequently believed the pope or the catholic church to be the anti-Christ, but I've gotta tell you...I just read the book by Gracia Burnham about their captivity by the muslim extremists Abu Sayyav....and I think Christianity has far greater risk from those people than you see from the Catholic church. Perhaps somewhere back in time the Catholic church was very powerful, but they're not today. And though there are certainly heresies, and I disagree with considering them a denomination like I disagree with considering adventism a denomination, we have to look at what the world is now verses what the world was in the reformers day. I'm not discounting what they saw, but I'm telling you, if the stories Gracia told about their desire to conquer the "Christian" world (read that as anything non-muslim), there is far greater danger than what the catholic church currently is. PLEASE don't read this that I dismiss the heresy there, but if you could read a bit of what someone under muslim captivity has experienced because they were Christians (though they weren't taken because they were Christians, they were taken because they were initially thought to have wealth to stay where they were staying), I'm afraid we're being unnecessarily detracted from a greater enemy than the catholic church. I've thought it for a long time, that the muslims are more "anti-Christ" now than the catholic church of modern day is, but if you read their story (and it seems almost personal since they went to college here locally and live just a few hours from here), I don't know how we could continue to give serious consideration that the catholic church is the anti-Christ.
As to concerns on the prayer meeting...I guess it just depends if you're assuming those on stage with TDJ knew of his divergent views. And if it casts a black eye on him, then to be consistent, there are those who go to Robert Schuller's church or sing with PCD and they should all equally be considered with the same raised eyebrow. Maybe it's overly generous to assume RW or others don't know the full scoop on TDJ...or maybe I'm just too naive. |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 342
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 10:58 am: | |
Melissa, I agree with the dangers to Christianity that the Islamic faith produces. However, those dangers are very apparent and obvious threats. The subtle threats that claim to be Christian and use Christian terms but lead their followers to a different Gospel are far more dangerous because of how sneaky the threat is. |
Brian3
Registered user
Username: Brian3
Post Number: 21
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 11:34 am: | |
Matthew 10:28
"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
|
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 2824
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 1:58 pm: | |
Melissa, I agree re: the grave dangers connected with Islam. Totally. I believe, though, that people who are "muudy" about the gospel can be seduced into accepting even greater heresies, such as Islam.
I'll never forget a sermon I heard in the LLU church a few years before we left. It specifically referred to non-Christian religions and said that people from all these religions would be saved--and they would be saved because Jesus died for the world.
Later (a few years), I spoke with the SDA director of Muslim relations about their evangelizing in Muslim countries. They adopted the plan of moving into Muslim communities, becoming part of the culture, and finding common ground with the Muslims via their mutual adherence to the OT food laws, their respect for Abraham and the patriarchs, their mutual respect for each other's holy books, etc.
Finally they would tell the Muslims with whom they interacted about Jesus. They could accept Him, the man told me, and still remain Muslim--because they worshiped the same God (or god).
There are so many problems with this idea. For one, Muslims do not believe Jesus is divine. Now, I suppose those Muslim converts to Adventism were told Jesus was God, but it didn't disturb any of them to leave those people inside the Muslim culture, practicing Muslim rituals and laws, but believing in Jesus because they worshiped the same God. Muslims don't worship the same God. A Muslim would NEVER accept a triune God.
My point is that while I consider Islam to be a threat, I believe that people with a blurred understanding of the gospel are vulnerable to "blending" heresies such as those within Islam with Christianity, of seeing each other as "similar" and honoring the same God. Why, then, would they need to be concerned about them? They just need to "get along" and share their enlightened understanding of Jesus.
It's easy for me to see how losing one's clarity of the true gospel sets one up for syncretism and a "religious tolerance" that says everyone has a right to their beliefs, and if a person is sincere, they'll be saved.
Jesus was clear: we have to forsake all for His sake, and we are called to protect the gospel in our own heads and hearts.
Colleen |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 957
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 2:02 pm: | |
But, Melissa, do you realize the late Pope who was revered and literally worshipped at his funeral even by representatives of this current evangelical community, do you realize that pope went into a mosque and kissed the Koran--this is documented in MacArthur's tape?! A famous evangelist said after 9/11 that Islam is actually quite close to Christianity. The papacy has recently stated that sincere Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists don't really need to hear about Christ.
There is no secret at all that the papacy would love to rule the world again. Ric-b is absolutely right that Islam is too obviously a false religion. But what about Jesus' warnings about the last day deceptions being so clever, that if it were possible, it would deceive the very elect. That is why Adventism, and RCC, as well as an evangelical church which shows evidence of apostacising by even tolerating and encouraging ministries that undermine the very heart of the Biblical teaching of the gospel and the Trinity, then, I think we need to put our guard up. I am not calling Warren a false teacher at this point, but I am just a little concerned about the incredible amount of power he has. When world leaders from everywhere come and visit him, and by his own admission he has unlimited resources, as he is friends with the world's top banking people, would that at least not wave a few red flags? I am not a conspiracy theorist, so I will wait and see before jumping to any conclusions, but, if anyone has any doubt about this concern and with the idea of Protestants and Catholics and even those on the fringe and outside of orthodox Christianity working together on a Global Peace Plan, then you need to read that pew forum transcript again at www.pewforum.org/events/index.php?EventID=80
Thanks Heretic for your interest, and I appreciate your comments. If anyone wants to order this most amazing CD or cassette--The MacArthur organization has given me permission to make as many cassettes as I want, but the CD's are still copyrighted. You can order these directly from www.gty.org or call 1-800-55-grace and ask for the lecture "Pope and the Papacy" which was recorded shortly after the late pope's death. I plan to use this tape as a witnessing tool for my SDA friends, as it will give me common ground with their concerns, and the clear gospel of grace and justification by faith alone is presented in a Biblical, concise way. This tape is not a hate motivated speech against RCC. It is a genuine, honest, appeal from the heart of MacArthur's genuine concern as to where the evangelical community has allowed themselves to be deceived. At the very end of the tape, he says "If the evangelical church can be so easily deceived by the pope, then it won't take much for the final anti-christ either".
If you want to wait until I get back from my vacation, and until I can make copies of cassette tapes (or does anyone have a tip on how I can get a bulk amount of cassette tapes reproduced cheaply?), then my offer stands for anyone who will e-mail me by getting it from Colleen, and requesting a copy of this tape to share with their SDA friends, then I will send you a copy as I get time in my busy schedule. My SDA mother wants copies, and my former SDA dad marvelled at how much this description of RCC sounds like SDA.
Stan |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1162
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 3:00 pm: | |
I guess I don't pay attention to what people do or say about the pope. I heard public snippits of his remarks I agreed with, and others I didn't. But he and his religion are irrelevant to me and my faith. Maybe I'm just highly sensitive after years of listening to B tell me I'm just doing what the pope has told me to do, when I wouldn't have a clue what the pope says about most things except pro-life issues. And for those things which I agree with him on, I did admire his position. But my knowledge is pretty tunnelvisioned to pro-life things. I don't think that probably makes me much of an expert on what other people think of him.
Regarding islam being close to Christianity, I think Gracia said there were some foundational similarities. They both hold to the OT patriarchs, and she listed some other things. Of course, the divergence is the role of Christ vs. Muhammed. Christ was another one of the prophets to them and Muhammed, though another prophet was an exalted prophet. They tried to share the gospel with them, but they could never see Christ as anything but a prophet. And they believe so strongly in what they know of the Koran. I know little more about Islam than what I learned reading the book. Her last chapter was a wakeup call to Christians to understand how to deal with militant muslims. During their captivity, had they became Muslims, their treatment would have been better. Those who "converted" even if only for the sake of treatment, received more food rations, etc. I just found some of the things that had happened to them far more in line with some of the end time treatments than anything the catholic church has the power to do. And it is their goal to take over the world, ridding the world of "Christians".
I have access to a high speed tape duplicator at church, but the tapes have to be purchased. We sell them for $3, which is just about our cost for the cassette, case and mailing fees. Don't know if that is appealing to anyone.
(Message edited by melissa on October 28, 2005) |
Windmotion
Registered user
Username: Windmotion
Post Number: 221
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 9:27 am: | |
Watched an interesting special on NBC last night called "In God They Trust" about evangelicals as a political faction and their link to George Bush. Some stuff I agreed with, and some stuff I didn't. The show focused on a mega church in Colorado Springs called New Life. All the people they interviewed were very excited about their relationships with God.
They talked to one guy at a military academy who had left the "party life" when he got saved and joined the church. He was very heartfelt and shared his faith with the other guys at the academy. One friend in particualar was a nonpracticing Catholic, and this guy brought him to church a few times. At the end, the friend said the evangelical guy had motivated him to go back to the Catholic church. And the evangelical guy had no problem with that, just as long as he is worshipping Jesus, he said.
The whole political issue was interesting too. One Sunday the church invited a former Reagan advisor to speak, and not all the churchgoers were completely enthused.
The church members said some really heartfelt stuff about after getting saved how God was the most important thing in their life and how because of Him they really found out what happiness was, etc. I kept waiting for someone to explain the pure gospel message of surrender, because it came across as going to church, praying, and reading your Bible and obeying it was all it took to be a Christian. Of course people could have said it, but NBC edited it out.
The political issue is harder to wrap my mind around. It's a democracy, so Christians should have their say, and I don't believe the SDA pet phrase "Jesus wasn't political, so we shouldnt be either." Jesus didn't do a lot of professions that aren't wrong today. But at the same time I can see Christians in politics going overboard and destroying the religious plurality of our nation and making all nonChristians very angry in the process.
So, anyone else see it, have any thoughts?
Curiously,
Hannah |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 346
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 10:29 am: | |
Hannah, I have no issue with Christian's being involved politically or even (gasp) being a politician. I have difficulty balancing the desire (that I think all Christ followers should have) to fight injustice in the world with the understanding that we are not called to create a heaven on earth, nor could we. As I struggle to find and maintain a balance in my own life on this area, I can hardly judge others for not reaching all the same conclusions that I have.
I see unfortunate situations is which one of the political parties is portrayed as the "Christian" party. Unfortunately none of the political parties put God first in everything. Neither is devoted to fighting injustice in all of its forms. Both place their interest in remaining in power and supporting those who finance them. |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 960
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 11:50 pm: | |
I agree Ric about how a political party has misused Christianity.
Melissa, I think I hear you saying that "B" may have overexaggeratd the RCC problem from an SDA standpoint, and that you may be tired of hearing the anti-RCC rhetoric, and I also sensed this from Hannah, since she went to Bob Jones Univ. But I hope that both of you order this tape and listen to a fresh different perspective dealing with Biblical and historical facts as stated by MacArthur, who is no "out in left field kook", but offers solid Biblical perspective. I will go ahead and post my email, so anyone who is a registered member of FAF can get this remarkable tape. riverfonz@aol.com |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1188
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 16, 2005 - 12:53 pm: | |
Don't know how I missed this post, but was looking for where we talked about mac Bible software and noticed it. I saw that show too, Hannah. I thought it was typical major media spin on Christianity. The man from Colorado Springs worked at focus on the family, so I'm guessing he's pretty orthodox. But that's the way media spins things. I saw something on dateline last week about Christmas and they actually mentioned it being more about a relationship with Christ than a matter of dos/don'ts, but they were giving both sides of the arguments and sometimes it was so philosophical, I couldn't follow it very well.
Regarding RCC, I guess my information comes from the family and friends that I know who are catholic more than knowing the official positions of the church. Maybe like some SDAs know more about what they believe than the official positions of the church either past or present. My real position with B is that he thinks RCC has tainted everything that isn't adventist. So, all protestantism, no matter who you are, that isn't adventist (since he thinks they are the ultimate protestants) is still influenced by what the pope says and does. Most people I associate with only know what the pope says based upon what's in the major media outlets on news reports. I suspect that's very little. But B associates every evil in the world with RCC. I see way more blatant evils in Islam than with the current RCC, and I don't think islamics are looking to the pope to get their directions for the jihads. When I look at where the violent evil is, it comes out of the extremist arm of islam, not out of the RCC. Does that vindicate RCC for errors? No, but I don't see it as the greatest threat lurking around the world, especially against Christians. I know people who genuinely got saved while catholic, just like there are many genuinely saved as SDAs. Even if the hierarchy of the RCC is not accurate about the gospel, to presume no catholic knows the gospel is no different than saying that because the SDA hierarchy is teaching a false gospel, that there aren't pockets of graced based people in the religion. I adamantly disagree with the doctrines of the religion that are contrary to the gospel or the other essentials. But I don't see the catholic terrorists killing people in the name of their religion (talking present day, not history). And there is no gospel in islam that is remotely close to the truth of Christ, yet it seems this discussion finds islam preferrable to catholicism? If I had to pick to be with a RC or a muslim, not knowing their perspective of Christians, I'd choose a RC any day.
I'd be interested in the tape to learn more in general, but I doubt it will change my perspective of Islam as a great threat to Christians (actually killing people because they're Christian ... a liberally defined term in islam). |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 2932
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 16, 2005 - 5:02 pm: | |
Yes, Melissa, I agree that Islam is a greater immediate threat to Christianity in the world right now.
Here's what I wouldn't have a hard time imagining, however--I suspect that as people become more and more focused on stopping the terrorism of "fundamentlaist extremists", it wouldn't necessarily be a huge leap to include "fundamentalist extremists" from Christianity in the public viewfinder as "dangerous" or "divisive". The idea of Jesus being the only way to the Father is seen as pretty dangerous and exclusivist by people who don't actually know Him!
No, I don't think there's any way to see Islam as less of a threat. It's a very great threat. I theorize, however, that it might be possible for people to begin seeing Christ-followers as dangerous to society at some point.
I praise God that these possibilites don't panic me any more. God is sovereign, and my life is hidden with Christ in God!
Colleen |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1016
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, November 17, 2005 - 9:45 pm: | |
Melissa, I thought this thread was inactive, and then I just read your most recent post. I am trying hard to understand what you are saying.My contention is that we are involved in a spiritual battle. To say that Islam represents a greater threat to Christianity than counterfeits such as Catholicism and SDA misses the entire point. You even said that some of us find "Islam preferable to Catholicism". Respectfully , Melissa, that is comparing apples to oranges. I would submit to you, and anyone else reading this thread, that from a spiritual and soul saving perspective, what presents the greatest threat?Does Islam present any spiritual threat to professing or nominal Christians? Does works-righteousnes salvation taught by Catholicism and SDA offer a spiritual threat to professing or nominal Christians? The RCC and SDA churches both assure their members that if they follow their special prescription of keeping the Sabbath, or doing penances, and going to Mass, then they can be assured that they are doing their duty. What a seductive message that is!
Some of you may be tired of hearing about how great a reformer Martin Luther was. However, there have been many threads on this forum started by people who are excited by what Luther stood for. Let us remember Luther risked his life to stand up to one of the most corrupt and abominable religions to ever be invented by man, and that is the Roman Catholic Church. As John MacArthur says, "the true church of Jesus Christ has always believed that Catholicism is a front for the kingdom of Satan." Now that may sound harsh and unloving, but MacArthur also says that there is nothing more loving than rescuing someone from a damning doctrinal system.
Now, has the RCC changed its views? Has it become more Christian? The RCC will do whatever it has to do in any country of the world to morph into what that country's culture is. In America it looks very sanitized and has fooled major evangelical leaders. However, tonight on Fox News Channel, I see where Fidel Castro is praising the Roman Catholic church in his country. Isn't that nice?
I am just trying to understand why the evangelical community is just embracing this false religion? Does what Luther stood for count for anything? Is the doctrine that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone precious to these evangelical leaders? There is clearer and clearer evidence that this doctrine is being lost.
As a former SDA, the doctrine of justification by faith alone is vitally important. Luther said that on this doctrine the Christian church rises or falls. Do you agree? If you do agree with Luther on this, then the way he saw the church was this. Romans 11:5 says "There is a remnant saved by grace, for if it wer by works, then grace would no longer be grace. InAdventism we were taught a false doctrine of the remnant church. But Paul, and the Reformers taught that there is a true remnant church saved by grace alone through faith alone. SDA and Catholicism, and many influential evangelical leaders don't believe this. When Revelation talks about the mark of the beast and 666, and Babylon, and warns us to come out of her my people, I believe it is talking about a works based religion. The final test on who are the true people of God is not based on what day you worship on, but is based on are you resting in the true Sabbath rest of Christ alone for your salvation.
Rome does not believe in salvation through Christ alone. Some may say, well hasn't Rome changed. They have not. The council of Trent which has been affirmed over and over again by recent popes including the current pope, says that anyone who believes that salvation is through faith alone is to be eternally damned!! That was meant as a direct assault on Luther and Calvin. This is why I am so disturbed about what I have seen in modern evangelical leaders, and why I may have gotten carried away at times with some of my rhetoric on this thread. But as MacArthur says, there is so much at stake in this debate. It is the heart of the gospel that is being truly compromised.
At this season of Thanksgiving, I am truly thankful fro the sacrifices of all the faithful Christians through the centuries who have preserved the great Reformation faith that we all love. I am thankful for Luther, Calvin, Knox, Tyndale, and so many other reformers, missionaries, and martyrs who have helped preserve this great gospel. The gates of hell shall not prevail against it as Jesus promised.
Soli Deo Gloria,
Stan |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1193
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 1:50 pm: | |
I guess I'm confused why Rome not believing in salvation through Christ alone is any different than Islam not believing in salvation by Christ at all? And I don't think any evangelical I know is embracing any Catholicism as an acceptable religion, but do you deny it is possible to be saved in the SDA or RCC religions? Is it possible to be saved in Islam? Isn't unsaved unsaved regardless of which religion deceived/mislead? I have asked before, and I know no one "knows" but if one genuinely professes Christ and invites him to their lives (as many SDAs do, and I know some Catholics who say the same thing...) even if they add to it sabbathkeeping or some other things, does that mean that their profession is worthless and they're not really saved? I asked the question specifically because of B. He says the right words in theory about salvation by grace...but in practice in his mind his eternal condition is impacted by where, when he goes to church and what he believes. So, even if there is gross error in the understanding of salvation by works vs salvation unto works, does that mean there are not genuinely saved people who also embrace all the errors as well? Most people on here talk about being saved in adventism, even while believing the errors. Many even talk about the genuinely saved who are still in adventism. Are genuinely saved people in more spiritual danger than those who have no relationship with Christ at all? I thought once I was saved, I was set until the day of redemption by the Holy Spirit.
Also, what do you do with the fastest growing religion in the world, which is Islam? Catholicism is shrinking, mormonism is growing. And the many others...buddism, hinduism, new age, scientology, .... I feel more threat from those who don't want me to have a Bible at all than from those who want to twist it, as reprehensible as that is. Those religions don't even have anything of the gospel in them. Are they not a spiritual threat to people? Islam may not threaten a truly saved Christian, but what about the non-Christian. And is genuine salvation really at risk because of error? If so, we've all got something to fear because I've not "arrived" in all understanding. I'm sure that sounds like I'm minimizing error, I'm not, but error with Christ seems different than error without Christ. Because I'm sure my understanding is not perfect. Besides, it sounds like B saying that if he doesn't believe the truth he'll somehow "disappoint" God and therefore his salvation is at risk.
I guess I just don't understand why one group is more of a threat than the other. To me, I think any group without Christ is more of a threat than those who are in error. Those without Christ not only have error, but lack Christ. I'd rather be in error with Christ than be in error without Christ...does that make any sense at all?
To find out the spiritual threat from Islam, I guess one should talk to a Christian trying to live in an Islamic nation. Or talk to the Japanese girl who has accepted Christ, knowing that her buddist family will disown her when they find out.
Colleen, I think you're right about the fears of extremists. And the real threat isn't merely the truly extremist "Christian", one need only look at what Pat Robertson's remarks have done to the missionary community in Venezuela, but that more and more an extremist will be defined as anyone that is vocal. Even James Dobson is becoming labeled as an extremist in some media outlets for little more than speaking his mind.
I don't fear per se, but when I hear that missionary friends of mine have been chased from their home I do fear for them. No one wants to hear of someone being killed or physically harmed for their faith in Christ, I wouldn't think. Not for their spiritual safety, but for their physical safety. History has proven time and again the Christianity has grown in areas of such martyrdom, but that is little comfort for the mom who has lost a son and daughter-in-law, who have given the ultimate price for Christ. Luther may have risked his life, but is he "greater" than the people who have left home and family to truly lose their life for Christ? That is not meant to minimimze Luther, but he was in his own home, own country. What about a Jim Elliott ... was his impact less important, he was killed as were those with him so I say he was at risk. How does one classify risk that honors God and other types of risk that what, don't?
I am really confused about the classification of risks/threats and that which is tolerable, even excusable, and that which is spiritual. I'm not trying to be difficult. I wasn't raised SDA so I don't understand the constant focus on them to the exclusion of other groups which teach nothing, right or wrong, about Christ. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 2944
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 4:52 pm: | |
Melissa, I have struggled with the same questions for a long time. I don't feel I really have definitive answers yet, either.
For a long time I thought that "what" we believed wasn't as important as "who" we believed. I still "believe" that, but I define it a bit differently now. I'm beginning to see that "belief" is not merely assent. If there's not a heart surrender and a willingness to follow truth, "belief" is just a word.
I believe that false gospels which include Jesus are as dangerous as no gospel but in a different way. On one hand, hearing "another gospel" gives one a chance to hear about Jesus and perchance to pursue one's own study. On the other hand, "another gospel" tells one that if they believe in Jesus AND do other things, then they're saved. The problem is that when people "believe in Jesus" plus other things, they usually don't really believe in Jesus.
At least, that phenomenon is what I experienced in Adventism. Very few people I knew who professed Jesus really knew him. Even today there are certain conservative Adventists I know who talk the talk, "believe in Jesus", believe nothing but Jesus saves them--but I feel quite certain they are not born from above. In spite of all their "do-goodism" and "correct" talk, they are angry, rigid, hostile, personally dishonest without ever "lying", etc. They actually bring a palpable heaviness with them wherever they go.
This is the problem with believing heresy. Even though one knows he needs Jesus, they don't understand exactly what that means. They understand it by the church's definition. They THINK they're Christians, but they're often really lost.
While I believe I belonged to Jesus as an Adventist, I believe that was more about that I wanted truth and wanted Jesus, and He placed that desire in me at a very young age. The point was that He purposefully led to me Himself and out of the false gospel into His freedom.
People who think they have Jesus because they've "accepted Him" and believe [the law, confession, the Sabbath, soul sleep, purgatory, etc.] often haven't truly accepted Him. Their hearts are not surrendered to Him, and they're not born again. They are loyal to their system which includes Jesus rather than to the real Jesus.
Paul was firm about "another gospel" because it can keep one from experiencing the grace of God.
Colleen |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1017
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 8:07 pm: | |
The whole book of Galatians is dealing with this idea of those teachers who say they believe in Jesus, but to Christ they are adding something else that is necessary. In this book Paul saved his harshest rhetoric for these people. I don't think Paul used any stronger language even for people who didn't believe in Jesus, because those people didn't present near the threat that this Galatian heresy presented to a fledgling young body of believers. This idea (which SDA and RCC teach), that faith in Christ alone is not enough to save struck at the very heart of the gospel which Paul had teached. In Gal 1:8,9 Paul gave the strongest indictment ever that those who preach a gospel other than what we have preached let him be anathema--Just so there was no confusion he repeated it twice. So those folks who add Sabbathkeeping, tithe-paying, Mary worship, penances etc stand under the damning statement that Paul gave. Then in Gal. 5:12, he gets really direct and advises those who are teaching circumcision to go all the way and mutilate themselves entirely. That is strong language! But that is what he thought about those who would teach this counterfeit gospel.
Yet, today, respected evangelical leaders are openly praising RCC as just another Christian denomination. Since you asked, Melissa about who has specifically done this, feel free to email me using the address posted above and I will give you the info. Is it any wonder then that the evangelical world thinks of Adventism as just another Christian denomination? It is like the old frog in the water story, where you start with tepid water, and then gradually heat the water, then the frog doesn't know that he is being destroyed in increments, but that is what happens when legalism gets it hold on the church.
The whole world was captivated by the late pope's death. The world loves all the pomp and circumstance that the papacy brings with that pontifical hat that is tiered with diamonds and jewelry worth millions of dollars taken at the expense of widows and other needy people. What a massive display of idolatry that was manifested at that funeral to honor a dead man whose coffin honored Mary above Christ. But the theology which this pope believed written in his own words from his own books, is so unbelievably shocking. I was ignorant of this until I recently heard the documentation on the tape that I referenced by MacArthur. The one statement he made at the end of the tape was thought provoking. "If the evangelical world can be so easily fooled by this pope, it won't take much to fool them when the final antichrist is revealed." The new pope's first statement after he was installed as the new "Vicar of Christ" was "I commit myself and the entire church into the hands of Mary".
This new pope is very charismatic, in fact maybe more so that the late pope. He is drawing even bigger crowds. At a recent Sunday gathering there were 150,000 people very excited. Pope Benedict told this throng, that Catholics and Protestants need to unite and work together. The final false world religion may comprise Apostate Protestantism and Catholicism in a sycretistic religion that includes elements of Islam, New Age, Mormonism, and elements of Judaism. I don't know for sure, and eschatology is not my field of expertise, but does it make sense to say that the only true religion is the Sabbath rest of trusting in Christ alone plus nothing? Does it make sense that there is only one other religion in the world, and that is the religion of man's works?
I just see so much similarity between SDA, RCC, and the other false religions. But the good news is, that if we are truly in Christ, then it is not possible to deceive the very elect. Jesus in Matt. 24 says "if it were possible" these last day's delusions would deceive the very elect. Believers have nothing to fear for the future, as our perseverance has been sealed by the Holy Spirit and guaranteed. Praise God indeed!
Stan
|
|
