PDA

View Full Version : From Apostacy to paganism - CNN article


ReformedBaptist
04-02-2009, 11:36 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/02/muslim.minister.defrocked/index.html

Episcopal minister defrocked after becoming a Muslim

Another example of the continuing decline and ignorance of liberal/apostate "Christianity"

Revmitchell
04-02-2009, 12:18 PM
Maybe she believes that "It is possible for someone who does not know Jesus to be saved. But anyone who is going to be saved is going to be saved by Jesus.." ~Dallas Willard

Baptist Believer
04-02-2009, 12:40 PM
Maybe she believes that "It is possible for someone who does not know Jesus to be saved. But anyone who is going to be saved is going to be saved by Jesus.." ~Dallas Willard
In the manner of a infantile coward, you have abandoned the discussion where you first brought this up (beginning in post #28) (http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=58492&page=3), and are trying to misrepresent Dallas Willard, a brother in Christ, by taking a quote completely out of context and trying to apply it to a completely different type of situation.

I would expect this kind of behavior out of a rebellious teenager, but not out of a man who is a pastor and supposed to be a mature Christian example.

Revmitchell
04-02-2009, 12:50 PM
In the manner of a infantile coward, you have abandoned the discussion where you first brought this up (beginning in post #28) (http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=58492&page=3), and are trying to misrepresent Dallas Willard, a brother in Christ, by taking a quote completely out of context and trying to apply it to a completely different type of situation.

I would expect this kind of behavior out of a rebellious teenager, but not out of a man who is a pastor and supposed to be a mature Christian example.

First, the quote is here (http://www.dwillard.org/articles/artview.asp?artID=14) for all to see in its context. Second, you just run around in circles and advance nothing. Since you and I were the only ones to discuss (on topic) that thread I gave it up. Third, this is exactly the same type of situation. That is again available to be seen by anyone who wants to.

We disagree on doctrine. And because of that you refer to me as infantile. The heresy espoused by Willard is beyond infantile or sophomoric, it is straight out deceit. Now you can runaround this board and follow me all you want to. But my position will remain the same.

So you can create drama by making irrelevant claims of abandoning threads,misrepresentation, and infantile rebellious behavior. But that is an example of what you are accusing me of. Move on.

ReformedBaptist
04-02-2009, 01:19 PM
First, the quote is here (http://www.dwillard.org/articles/artview.asp?artID=14) for all to see in its context. Second, you just run around in circles and advance nothing. Since you and I were the only ones to discuss (on topic) that thread I gave it up. Third, this is exactly the same type of situation. That is again available to be seen by anyone who wants to.

We disagree on doctrine. And because of that you refer to me as infantile. The heresy espoused by Willard is beyond infantile or sophomoric, it is straight out deceit. Now you can runaround this board and follow me all you want to. But my position will remain the same.

So you can create drama by making irrelevant claims of abandoning threads,misrepresentation, and infantile rebellious behavior. But that is an example of what you are accusing me of. Move on.

I read the Willard article myself. Yes, he is teaching heresy. From what I can tell, he is part of those folks trying to re-introduce mysticism into Christianity.

Revmitchell
04-02-2009, 01:24 PM
I read the Willard article myself. Yes, he is teaching heresy. From what I can tell, he is part of those folks trying to re-introduce mysticism into Christianity.


Mysticism and ecumenicism or Universalism.

annsni
04-02-2009, 01:43 PM
Well, I will introduce you to the pastor who is an athiest:

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3532

ReformedBaptist
04-02-2009, 01:45 PM
Well, I will introduce you to the pastor who is an athiest:

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3532

Good grief.

Revmitchell
04-02-2009, 01:57 PM
Psa 14:1 To the choirmaster. Of David. The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." ........

Baptist Believer
04-02-2009, 02:48 PM
First, the quote is here (http://www.dwillard.org/articles/artview.asp?artID=14) for all to see in its context.
Yep, although you are using it out of context.

Second, you just run around in circles and advance nothing. Since you and I were the only ones to discuss (on topic) that thread I gave it up. Third, this is exactly the same type of situation. That is again available to be seen by anyone who wants to.
I obviously disagree with your characterization, but I do agree that the discussion is there for everyone to see, and I encourage everyone to read it.

We disagree on doctrine.
Yes.

And because of that you refer to me as infantile.
Nope, I base that assessment on your actions. I disagree doctrinally all the time with people, but they know how to treat others fairly and with respect. And they also don't stoop to false accusations and misrepresentations of others.

The heresy espoused by Willard is beyond infantile or sophomoric, it is straight out deceit. Now you can runaround this board and follow me all you want to. But my position will remain the same.
I'm hardly following you around, but I don't appreciate seeing false accusations about anyone. Now I see you've added another false accusation (that is, "straight out deceit") without any evidence.

So you can create drama by making irrelevant claims of abandoning threads,misrepresentation, and infantile rebellious behavior. But that is an example of what you are accusing me of. Move on.
No drama. Just pointing out that you're misrepresenting a Christian brother.

Baptist Believer
04-02-2009, 02:52 PM
I read the Willard article myself. Yes, he is teaching heresy.
I would disagree, but you have the right to your opinion. I would suggest you spend more time with Willard's thinking (move beyond that one article, written as a guide to an apologetic method for an apologetics publication) before you write him off as a heretic.

From what I can tell, he is part of those folks trying to re-introduce mysticism into Christianity.
Certainly he teaches that believers hear the voice of the Shepherd (as Jesus teaches), so that makes him a "mystic" to many Christians. However, "mysticism" is such a broad and imprecise term, I'm afraid folks don't draw careful distinctions between pagan mysticism and biblical mysticism.

Baptist Believer
04-02-2009, 02:56 PM
Mysticism and ecumenicism or Universalism.
Mysticism = Yes, although according to the biblical standard.

Ecumenicism = Yes, although according to the common faith of Christian individuals, not religious institutions.

Universalism = No, not by any sane or honest definition.

Revmitchell
04-02-2009, 02:56 PM
I would disagree, but you have the right to your opinion. I would suggest you spend more time with Willard's thinking (move beyond that one article, written as a guide to an apologetic method for an apologetics publication) before you write him off as a heretic.


Certainly he teaches that believers hear the voice of the Shepherd (as Jesus teaches), so that makes him a "mystic" to many Christians. However, "mysticism" is such a broad and imprecise term, I'm afraid folks don't draw careful distinctions between pagan mysticism and biblical mysticism.

There is no biblical mysticism. More heresy.But you go right ahead and keep on exposing yourself.

http://thinkuni.startlogic.com/page3.html

http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-mysticism.html

ReformedBaptist
04-02-2009, 03:02 PM
I would disagree, but you have the right to your opinion. I would suggest you spend more time with Willard's thinking (move beyond that one article, written as a guide to an apologetic method for an apologetics publication) before you write him off as a heretic.


Certainly he teaches that believers hear the voice of the Shepherd (as Jesus teaches), so that makes him a "mystic" to many Christians. However, "mysticism" is such a broad and imprecise term, I'm afraid folks don't draw careful distinctions between pagan mysticism and biblical mysticism.


We draw plenty of careful distinctions. Both are satanic, but the latter is more deceptive passing off as Christian and seeking to decieive even God's elect.

Baptist Believer
04-02-2009, 03:47 PM
There is no biblical mysticism. More heresy.But you go right ahead and keep on exposing yourself.
Uh, yeah...

http://thinkuni.startlogic.com/page3.html (http://thinkuni.startlogic.com/page3.html)
This is a site by followers of Unity, a cult founded my Charles and Myrtle Fillmore based on the New Thought movement. It does not and has never had anything to do with Christianity. Neither Willard nor I approve or endorse this garbage.

Citing this link as an example of what Willard or I believe is comparable to me linking to a Jehovah's Witness site and claiming that's what you believe.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-mysticism.html (http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-mysticism.html)
I've only glanced through the article, but it seems clear the author isn't really talking about what Willard advocates. He's also trying to draw distinctions between dying to self in favor of Christ and emulating Christ, which to people like me and teachers like Willard are not at cross-purposes. Jesus taught His disciples how to live be His example. He also instructed them the only way they could do it effectively was to die to themselves. There is no contradiction.

Revmitchell
04-02-2009, 04:18 PM
Uh, yeah...


This is a site by followers of Unity, a cult founded my Charles and Myrtle Fillmore based on the New Thought movement. It does not and has never had anything to do with Christianity. Neither Willard nor I approve or endorse this garbage.

Citing this link as an example of what Willard or I believe is comparable to me linking to a Jehovah's Witness site and claiming that's what you believe.

[URL="http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-mysticism.html"]
I've only glanced through the article, but it seems clear the author isn't really talking about what Willard advocates. He's also trying to draw distinctions between dying to self in favor of Christ and emulating Christ, which to people like me and teachers like Willard are not at cross-purposes. Jesus taught His disciples how to live be His example. He also instructed them the only way they could do it effectively was to die to themselves. There is no contradiction.


Oh you mean like this:


...............One of the standard things that misleads people in approaching Christian mystics is how they frequently mention the loss of consciousness of themselves in their most ecstatic experience of God. Loss of self awareness is in fact a common human phenomenon, and not one that occurs only in religious or mystical experiences. But this loss never implies, to Christian mystics, that they cease to exist as individuals or that they are absorbed into the Absolute. Theirs is a different metaphysics, which is one of persons in relationship, not of an illusory separate being dissolving into the "All."

Now of course there are many forms of mystical experience and mysticism. Even atheists have mystical experiences. But there is a clear distinction between the enduring and powerful mysticism implicit in the Christian tradition and that in the non-theistic world religions. Here we do not even raise the question of which is best. But the idea that there is a mystical life that stands free from the specific forms found among human cultures, and that one can actually live such a life in the course of routine human affairs, is simply a fanciful ideal that cannot support the weight of the personal and ethical heroism life requires of us. One can no more live a life of effectual devotion to good from the resources of "the timeless, perennial mystical tradition" than you can paint with color but no specific color.

The specific "color" or Christian mysticism is devotion to Jesus Christ. There is a lot of room for spelling out exactly what that means, and a lot of ways of putting it into practice. Pretty clearly this was the "mysticism" of Florence Nightingale, as is shown from her explicit language, the people she consulted with, and the context of religious life in her times. Her departure from various details of the nominal or real Christianity she encountered around her is better explained by her devotion to Christ than by any reversion to plain-wrap mysticism or to non-orthodox beliefs. The overriding question faced by most professionals today, including nurses, has to do with what they are really devoted to, and what are their life sustaining resources, in pursuing their profession. An honest, thorough inquiry into the possibilities here is what is called for. Are there any preferable alternatives to an all-out, experiential devotion to Christ? Then let us find them and live them. If not, let us live in union with the Absolute who is Jesus Christ.

http://www.dwillard.org/articles/artview.asp?artID=131

ReformedBaptist
04-02-2009, 04:23 PM
I have no idea what that man is talking about. I just know He isn't talking about Jesus, the Bible, or truth.

Revmitchell
04-02-2009, 04:27 PM
I have no idea what that man is talking about. I just know He isn't talking about Jesus, the Bible, or truth.

That is because you have not come to the place where you have lost your self awareness so you can experience human phenomenon and become one the the "all".:laugh:

Baptist Believer
04-03-2009, 08:08 AM
I have no idea what that man is talking about.

He's a philosophy professor, so he tends to write very densely. Let's break it down carefully:

One of the standard things that misleads people in approaching Christian mystics is how they frequently mention the loss of consciousness of themselves in their most ecstatic experience of God.
Simply put, he is saying that many Christians get nervous about the phenomenon of Christians not being self-conscious in the midst of worship and other exercises of devotion to God.

Loss of self awareness is in fact a common human phenomenon, and not one that occurs only in religious or mystical experiences.
Loss of self-awareness happens in all kinds of situations, not just religious situations, for instance, when engrossed in a good book or watching a movie, sometimes you lose your sense of time, awareness of what is going on around you, and a normal sense of physical needs (like hunger pangs).

But this loss never implies, to Christian mystics, that they cease to exist as individuals or that they are absorbed into the Absolute.
In many (perhaps most) types of non-Christian mysticism, there is the belief that the individual nature of personhood is an illusion to be overcome and the goal of the religion is to lose a sense of self.

[Christian mysticism] is a different metaphysics, which is one of persons in relationship, not of an illusory separate being dissolving into the "All."
Christian mystics recognize that we are individual persons created by God who are called to exist in loving relationship to God and each other. We are not "becoming God" or seeking to be dissolved into God, losing all personal identity.

Now of course there are many forms of mystical experience and mysticism. Even atheists have mystical experiences.
Mysticism (that is, experience involving our spiritual nature) is common to humankind.

But there is a clear distinction between the enduring and powerful mysticism implicit in the Christian tradition and that in the non-theistic world religions.
All mysticism is not alike. What he is talking about in the Christian tradition is vitally different than what is going on in Eastern religions.

Here we do not even raise the question of which is best. But the idea that there is a mystical life that stands free from the specific forms found among human cultures...
Willard is pointing out that mysticism must be tied to a belief system...

...and that one can actually live such a life in the course of routine human affairs, is simply a fanciful ideal that cannot support the weight of the personal and ethical heroism life requires of us.
...and that belief system must have the power to actually transform our lives. Living the good life requires personal and ethical heroism (putting the needs of others before your own). In other words, dying to self and living toward God.

Willard routinely pounds home a number of themes in his teaching. One of which is that every human being who has ever lived is being spiritually formed. The problem is that those without Christ are being spiritually formed in profoundly flawed ways. Obviously some ways are worse than others (Stalin vs. Oprah), but all fail to produce the transformed character in human beings that inherently produces someone who courageously and consistently does good works from the proper motives.

The New Testament is full of references to Christians and non-Christians being judged according to their deeds. The New Testament writers assumed Christians would be transformed through their denial of self and emulation of Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. Today many Christians stumble over those passages because it doesn't match their experience and then condemn those who see those passages as completely consistent with the teachings of Christ as those who are teaching a gospel of "works" instead of understanding good works are empowered by a gospel of grace.

One can no more live a life of effectual devotion to good from the resources of "the timeless, perennial mystical tradition" than you can paint with color but no specific color.
You can't have a vague Oprah-type spirituality. It must be based on something.


The specific "color" or Christian mysticism is devotion to Jesus Christ.
Devotion to Christ is the foundation of Christian mysticism/spirituality.

There is a lot of room for spelling out exactly what that means, and a lot of ways of putting it into practice. Pretty clearly this was the "mysticism" of Florence Nightingale, as is shown from her explicit language, the people she consulted with, and the context of religious life in her times.
I'm not very familiar with Florence Nightingale's life, but apparently Willard sees her spiritual formation in terms of reaction to the prevailing religious culture of her time.

Her departure from various details of the nominal or real Christianity she encountered around her is better explained by her devotion to Christ than by any reversion to plain-wrap mysticism or to non-orthodox beliefs.
Apparently he sees her deviation from the popular church teachings of the day (which Willard obviously believes was lacking) was because of her zeal for Christ, not the embrace of "color-less" mysticism (as referenced previously).

The overriding question faced by most professionals today, including nurses, has to do with what they are really devoted to, and what are their life sustaining resources, in pursuing their profession. An honest, thorough inquiry into the possibilities here is what is called for. Are there any preferable alternatives to an all-out, experiential devotion to Christ? Then let us find them and live them. If not, let us live in union with the Absolute who is Jesus Christ.
Another of Willard's major emphases is that he believes the teachings of Jesus can be compared to any other religious or secular teacher and be objectively recognized as superior. That if a person didn't know what to make of Jesus, Willard would suggest that the person put the teachings of Jesus into practice to see that His words are true, and that Jesus is true. And not only are the teachings of Jesus true, Jesus consistently lived by the ethics He taught and demonstrated He was Who He said He was through His death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and the gifting of the Spirit which He promised to His followers. Even today, those who reach out to Jesus experience Him personally and can hear His voice through the scripture, through the words of other believers in the community of faith, and through personal communication.

I share that opinion.

I just know He isn't talking about Jesus, the Bible, or truth.
I have to disagree. He's definitely talking about the biblical Jesus (of course, most of what is here is defining what is and isn't mysticism) and truth.

He did not mention the Bible in this excerpt, but rest assured, he has a very high view of scripture. He recommends committing large portions of it to memory as part of discipleship.

Baptist Believer
04-03-2009, 08:09 AM
That is because you have not come to the place where you have lost your self awareness so you can experience human phenomenon and become one the the "all".:laugh:
If that's what you got out of it, no wonder you're confused.

ReformedBaptist
04-03-2009, 08:26 AM
BB:

He's a philosophy professor, so he tends to write very densely. Let's break it down carefully:

Biblical truth is not philosophy. I saw that he was a philosopher and seeks to appease academia. Many evangelicals have been led into error like this seeking to please men (sound and be respectable).


I have to disagree. He's definitely talking about the biblical Jesus (of course, most of what is here is defining what is and isn't mysticism) and truth.

He did not mention the Bible in this excerpt, but rest assured, he has a very high view of scripture. He recommends committing large portions of it to memory as part of discipleship.

Ohhh...ok. He isn't expounding Scripture, isn't even talking about biblical doctrine...but no worries, he has a "high view of Scripture" and believes we should memorize it.

Does this man even believe the Scripture is the very Word of God, infallible and God-breathed? It would not surprise me one bit if he doesn't.

You are following a wolf.

Baptist Believer
04-03-2009, 08:52 AM
BB:
Biblical truth is not philosophy.
That's right. He makes his living as a philosopher and teaches the discipline at USC. He is also used to speaking to those philosophically trained, so he uses certain forms in communication that may not be familiar to everyone.

I saw that he was a philosopher and seeks to appease academia.
"Appease academia?" What in the word does that mean? The word philosophy literally means "love of wisdom."

He is a Christian who is also a philosopher.

Many evangelicals have been led into error like this seeking to please men (sound and be respectable).
You're really assuming evil motives when there is no reason to do so. He doesn't get much acclaim in philosophy circles because of his stand as a Christian. What he is doing is ministry to students. He is training students from all types of environments (many of them non-Christian) to think about truth in a serious, systematic way. As a Christian, he has the opportunity to point students to the One Who is truth.

Ohhh...ok. He isn't expounding Scripture...
Not in the part of the article RevMitchell selected. But all of his books and most of his articles do expound on scripture in depth. If you take a moment to examine his writing beyond items RevMitchell carefully selects, you'll see what I'm talking about. (http://books.google.com/books?id=yb1dpopRn-AC&dq=%22Divine+Conspiracy%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=MwTWScXeEI-MNcWVtfEO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7)

...isn't even talking about biblical doctrine...
Yes, in that particular article, he's not directly dealing with biblical doctrine. But plenty of people around here discuss things not directly related to biblical doctrine, but there seems to be no condemnation of them.

...but no worries, he has a "high view of Scripture" and believes we should memorize it.
Sarcasm aside, yes.

Does this man even believe the Scripture is the very Word of God, infallible and God-breathed?
Yep. But don't take my word, or especially RevMitchell's word, check it out for yourself.

It would not surprise me one bit if he doesn't.
If I believed what RevMitchell said without checking if for myself, I would feel the same way.

You are following a wolf.
Nope. I'm following Jesus.

Willard is simply a fellow traveler who has some very good insights.

ReformedBaptist
04-03-2009, 08:55 AM
That's right. He makes his living as a philosopher and teaches the discipline at USC. He is also used to speaking to those philosophically trained, so he uses certain forms in communication that may not be familiar to everyone.


"Appease academia?" What in the word does that mean? The word philosophy literally means "love of wisdom."

He is a Christian who is also a philosopher.


You're really assuming evil motives when there is no reason to do so. He doesn't get much acclaim in philosophy circles because of his stand as a Christian. What he is doing is ministry to students. He is training students from all types of environments (many of them non-Christian) to think about truth in a serious, systematic way. As a Christian, he has the opportunity to point students to the One Who is truth.


Not in the part of the article RevMitchell selected. But all of his books and most of his articles do expound on scripture in depth. If you take a moment to examine his writing beyond items RevMitchell carefully selects, you'll see what I'm talking about. (http://books.google.com/books?id=yb1dpopRn-AC&dq=%22Divine+Conspiracy%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=MwTWScXeEI-MNcWVtfEO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7)


Yes, in that particular article, he's not directly dealing with biblical doctrine. But plenty of people around here discuss things not directly related to biblical doctrine, but there seems to be no condemnation of them.


Sarcasm aside, yes.


Yep. But don't take my word, or especially RevMitchell's word, check it out for yourself.


If I believed what RevMitchell said without checking if for myself, I would feel the same way.


Nope. I'm following Jesus.

Willard is simply a fellow traveler who has some very good insights.

Since you derailed my thread, I am going to start a new one. Your posts here, frankly, are deceitful. This heretic is a co-hort of Foster, a compromiser with Antichrist (Roman Catholicism), and a promoter of pagan mysticism.

Baptist Believer
04-03-2009, 09:49 AM
Since you derailed my thread, I am going to start a new one.
I did not intend to do that. I apologize.

Your posts here, frankly, are deceitful.
I'm sorry, but there is no deceit in my heart regarding this matter. I am trying to simply tell the truth as clearly as I understand it.

This heretic is a co-hort of Foster, a compromiser with Antichrist (Roman Catholicism), and a promoter of pagan mysticism.
I completely disagree with your assessment, except that Willard is friends with Foster.