Featured Charles Stanley & Mysticism

This is just sad.

Charles Stanley? ((REALLY))??


I do not in any way think that Charles Stanley is a heritic, or peddling mysticism.

Goodness. :tear:

 

OK

I just read the artical that decribed Stanleys "so called " mystical" encounter.

I still have absolutly no problem with Brother Stanley. God bless him.

 

This was posted...

Whats the problem? God has spoken to me probably hundreds of times outside scripture. Not with audible words of course. But very tangable.

I wouldnt be surprised if most of us here on the board can say the same thing

 

Sadly, given the doctrinal train wreck we see among the Finneyists here, it wouldn't surprise me, either, that they would say they receive extra-Biblical revelation.

 

I take scripture alone so there is no need for visions and experiences.

 

Are you saying that you, and you alone, are the standard for everyone's relation with God?

If so you are getting very close to "adding to scripture"; not a very smart move.

 

I understand what Dr stanley is saying regarding the the Holy Spirit at times speaking to us thru things likedreams/visions/situations, my much bigger concerns is with his take on ME and how he sees even Apostates making heaven!

 

If you have no "experiences" with God, you need to consider whether or not you are one of His sheep (John 10:3-4, 14-15, 27-29).

We are called into a relationship with God which is NOT mediated through a book (even the Bible), but directly with/through Christ. The scriptures supplement that relationship and are invaluable, but we could still have a relationship with God without having any scripture. The most obvious example of this is Abraham - the one Paul used as an example in both Galatians and Romans to demonstrate that one can be right with God even without the Law and circumcision.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, a Calvinist that is limiting the sovereignty of God!

 

Don't they all? To be a determinist does just that.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, a Finneyist who has no problem lying to demonize his opponents.

 

Calvinist, Finneyist, Arminian,...

Why do such words have to be used among Baptists? We get upset when one used the "n" word because it is derogatory, yet at the same time we use words such as the three above in a derogatory manner, meaning them to indicate slander and shame.

Why do Baptists fight amongst themselves in such a manner? Do we honestly think God is pleased with our hateful remarks toward others?

 

Almost as bad as the fighting between Shia and Sunni muslims, only without the homocide bombers.

 

I thought I was in your Ignore file.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2004713&postcount=61

Who's the liar?

Please put me back in there!

 

Praise the Lord, sister, this is a wonderful testimony of God's leading. And it is not mysticism. It is simply the personal leading of the Holy Spirit, which occurs all throughout Scripture and in the lives of all of the famous saints of the past.

Nothing of what has been written about Stanley smacks of mysticism. For modern Christian mysticism, the people on this thread should investigate the works of Tozer (who was a Calvinist, if I'm not mistaken). The fundamental misunderstanding on this thread has nothing to do with the Cal/Arm debate.

If God does not personally lead us, then there is no such thing as a call to preach or be a missionary. And that is certainly not true.

 

The fundamental doctrinal misunderstanding on this thread is the failure to recognize what revelation is. James Orr speaks of it this way in his landmark book, Revelation and Inspiration: "It is customary to speak of the decay of faith in divine revelation, and in the sense intended, such a weakening of faith musts be acknowledged. In a wider respect, there is probably no proposition on which the higher religious philosophy of the past hundred years is more agreed than this--that all religion originates in revelation. Man can know God only as, in some way, God reveals, or makes Himself known, to man" (p. 2, emphasis in the original). So God's personal leading into His will is not mysticism, it is simply His Spirit guiding us.

When God called me to preach at age 18 by an unmistakable impression in my heart, and to be a missionary when I was 20, it was not revelation from God, and therefore not analogous to mysticism. It was based on my personal walk with God. Revelation is when God reveals things about Himself to us, and His plan for the ages, as in the Bible (special revelation) or through nature (general revelation).

The main book in recent years to weigh against God's personal leading of us is Decision Making and the Will of God, by Gary Friesen. I have books by Andrew Murray, F. B. Meyer, G. Campbell Morgan and others that defend the view I've just discussed and Charles Stanley teaches. It is not mysticism. It is simply the traditional view of God's leading, as admitted even by Friesen (who nonetheless sets up a straw man of it).

 

I wonder if you young folk know of George Mueller, the mighty prayer warrior? I've posted his advice here on the BB before, but it's been awhile, so here it is again. It is from his book, Answers to Prayer, p. 6, and it presupposes that God will lead us individually through His Holy Spirit's guidance.

How To Ascertain the Will of God​

George Mueller​

(1) I seek at the beginning to get my heart into such a state that it has no will of its own in regard to a given matter. Nine-tenths of the trouble with people generally is just here. Nine-tenths of the difficulties are overcome when our hearts are ready to do the Lord’s will, whatever it may be. When one is truly in this state, it is usually but a little way to the knowledge of what His will is.
(2) Having done this, I do not leave the result to feeling or simple impression. If so, I make myself liable to great delusions.
(3) I seek the Will of the Spirit of God through, or in connection with, the Word of God. The Spirit and the Word must be combined. If I look to the Spirit alone without the Word, I lay myself open to great delusions also. If the Holy Ghost guides us at all, He will do it according to the Scriptures and never contrary to them.
(4) Next I take into account providential circumstances. These often plainly indicate God’s Will in connection with His Word and Spirit.
(5) I ask God in prayer to reveal His Will to me aright.
(6) Thus, through prayer to God, the study of the Word, and reflection, I come to a deliberate judgment according to the best of my ability and knowledge, and if my mind is thus at peace, and continues so after two or three more petitions, I proceed accordingly. In trivial matters, and in transactions involving most important issues, I have found this method always effective.