Would You Accept an Invitation to Speak with the Dalai Lama, Bishop Tutu, and Pravrajika Vrajaprana?
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Mon, April 07, 2008
- Viewed 265
- (100) comments so far
For your response:
1. Would you speak at an event like this. (Obviously, I know that Rob Bell and Doug Pagitt are not endorsing the other speakers on the platform, but this does feed into the criticism both have had from inside the Christian camp, does it not?)
2. What good could come out of an event like this one? (I’ve thought about it and couldn’t really come up with anything).
Todd
I know that we kind of poke when some blogs get mad at 'their own' like John Piper for sharing the stage with a person such as Mark Driscoll. But, would you accept an invitation to speak at an "InterSpiritual" day that featured people like the Dalai Lama and top Hindu, Islamic, and Sikh leaders? Rob Bell and Doug Pagitt have. They'll be sharing at the Seeds of Compassion event in Seattle later this month. I'm wondering... what could the end result of this day be for the Christians involved? What's the end game on this one?
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Randy Ehle on Mon, April 07, 2008
I can’t quite say I would “absolutely” accept an invitation, but I certainly wouldn’t write it off for any of the reasons given so far. “What good could come out…?” Eternity. I don’t mean that tritely, either. It may be that we don’t see any mind-changing results, but don’t seeds need to be planted before fruit can be born? I can see great potential for sowing…and a party in heaven waiting to happen for the one sheep who may one day be found.
As for “how this looks to [Pagitt’s and Bell’s] critics” or helping “the emerging cause”, I just have to say that I don’t think either of those things matters. After all, if everything looked okay to our critics, they wouldn’t be critics, would they?!? Who are we supposed to be pleasing, anyway?! And what’s this about the emerging cause? Aren’t we supposed to be about the kingdom of God? Maybe…just maybe…this gives two respected Christian leaders a significant platform to speak truth to a gathering of people who could use some truth.
Obviously, we can only wait, hope, and pray before we will know what they say, let alone what the outcome will be.
bishopdave on Mon, April 07, 2008
purpose as stated on seedsofcompassion.org: An unprecedented gathering to engage the hearts and minds of our community by highlighting the vision, science, and programs of early social, emotional, and cognitive learning.
I agree in that it likely will not accomplish much. I have much trouble in seeing the value of “dialog.” When the conference is over, will there be funds or action taken to better feed educate and medicate the children they speak of? Is this conference going to result in action or sound bites? The $$ question—will the cost of this conference be offset by a huge rise in support to get funds to where a difference can be made?
pmp68 on Mon, April 07, 2008
I probably would not due to my own discomfort, but I don’t knock Christians who do, particularly if they are doing it to create dialogue. I think we each have to do what we are gifted to do. The good that I think “could” come out of a forum like this is good, honest dialogue. If someone’s eyes can be open to the truth of the gospel, all the better. Atmopsheres such as this one are often a little more open to the gospel and less hostile than other venues.
fishon on Mon, April 07, 2008
Wendi,
Oh you’ll love this. If my child had a Muslim school teacher, that would last about as long as it took me to get her or him out of that class.
fishon
fishon on Mon, April 07, 2008
Of course Bell and Pagitt would be prime candidates to appear with the lama. They won’t make waves and they will mush all over the guy. I imagine the lama will even bless them. yahoo!
fishon
fishon on Mon, April 07, 2008
Eric,
What do the others have to teach a Christian that they don’t already know? I am serious. Name me one thing they will learn that the Bible does NOT teach. Just one.
fishon
Wendi on Mon, April 07, 2008
I get really bothered by the expectation (CS) that a Christian must take over any forum into which he/she has been invited, use the time to condemn the sin of every non-believer present and point out every falsehood they become aware of . . . or else they’ve somehow sold out. This is a panel that I’m sure has a moderator who will in all likelihood pose questions to which the panelists will respond. This particular panel has been called together to discuss how their respective religious belief systems inform their opinions about and responses to contemporary issues we all face. This is a huge panel is huge and the session is listed on the schedule to go from 9:30 till 2:30, so there will have to be something interesting about the format. If the moderator asked something like . . .
“Despite their connectivity, statistics show that American youth feel very isolated and lonely. What are some spiritual responses to this?”
. . . why would the Christian panelist have to respond by telling the others that they have chosen a false religion, and that Jesus is the only road to God? I can think of many responses which represent Christianity correctly and in a way that is compelling. Simply answering the questions we’re asked is respectful, and doesn’t mean we’ve sold out in some way. On our turf we more control. When invited into someone else’s (like in public schools), we follow their rules and are grateful to have been invited. I think this rule applies here.
I understand that the critics of the emerging guys will get all over this, but Eric’s response to this makes the most sense. To NOT do something, just to pacify my critics, something that aligns with the core values I believe God has given me, is selling out and would hardly be pleasing to God. It seems like that is what you are suggesting these guys should do Todd.
And Fishon – [assuming that your kids are in public schools] how is it that you ascertain which faith, if any, your child’s teacher embraces? I guess that Christian education or home schooling is the only way to assure no non-Christian has any educational influence on one’s child, which is a course of action many Christian parents have chosen.
Also, the most important thing I learn from listening and learning conversations with people of other faiths is how they think and what they believe, which better equips me to engage in discussions about Jesus. Not learning from them, I am prone to ineffectiveness, babbling on with answers to questions they’re not asking.
Additionally, I have often learned how to live biblically by watching non-Christ-followers who do it better than me.
Wendi
fishon on Mon, April 07, 2008
Wendy,
It was you that gave the senario of a Muslim teacher, not me. I was just responding. Both my children went to public school. And that was in the day when a parent could request another teacher.
Sorry, Wendi, this statement of yours sounds nice, but sad: “Additionally, I have often learned how to live biblically by watching non-Christ-followers who do it better than me.”
Now this is not going to sound nice, but, why would you have to learn how to live biblically by watching non-Christ-followers, when the Bible tells you how to live in the first place. If the Bible is not incentive enough for you, how can non-believers be an incentive? I just don’t get it.
fisho
Wendi on Mon, April 07, 2008
Fishon –
I appreciate that you would choose to remove one of your kids from a class if you knew the teacher was Muslim, but you didn’t answer my question. How did you figure out the religious beliefs of every teacher so that you could decide whether he/she was satisfactory? Maybe, over the years, they did have a Muslim, Hindu, Mormon, Jehovah Witness, Buddhist, agnostic or atheist teacher. How would you have known?
My sister-in-law is Buddhist. Her religion teaches selflessness and concern for others. Often when I watch the way she lives her life, how she models selfless servanthood, I am deeply convicted by the Holy Spirit. Of course, the bible teaches me to live as a servant, but in both Jesus and my sister-in-law I find an example of this quality. To me, that is learning.
Wendi
eric wright on Tue, April 08, 2008
Fishon,
I would say that they can teach Christians a lot. Wendi pointed out one way. I would say that Ghandi puts many Christians to shame in the way his compassionate concern for the hurting and broken moved him to action.
The truth is, we can learn from anyone…if we want to. I would feel honored to meet the Dalai Lama or Desmond Tutu. That doesn’t mean I have to agree with their spiritual beliefs.
Peter Hamm on Tue, April 08, 2008
I absolutely would.
I will speak anywhere asked about Jesus.
Speaking once at an event does not, imho, fill the bill for any legitimate interpretation of “unequally yoked” imho, either.
But it is just adding fuel to the critics’ fires, isn’t it. More justified with Pagitt than Bell imho.
Leonard on Tue, April 08, 2008
I think this is an interesting post. I believe my calling is to preach the Gospel. This is a venue I could not fulfill that calling. I believe that the danger in talking to kids about spirituality right alongside of Hinduism, Buddhism and such is that there is a romantic love affair we have with these religions in the west. This love affair in contrast to the derision Christianity faces makes talking about being spiritual pointless.
When you travel to these other countries where these religions are the majority and smell the death they bring, that love affair goes away. If these guys wish to do this, I don’t care but the question was would you do it if you were asked… No, I most likely would not. Not my venue, not my calling.
Derek on Tue, April 08, 2008
Leonard,
What makes you think that you couldn’t preach the gospel in such a venue? If you were given the liberty to speak as a Christian at an ecumenical event like this, then what would stop you from talking about the life, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus?
I do understand what you are saying about the love affair we have with Eastern religions. I have been to India. In Northeast India you particularly see the mixing of Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus, and Muslims. There is great derision from radical Hindus and Muslims, although I have found Buddhists, particularly Tibetan Buddhists, to be rather friendly towards Christians. Honestly, most Hindus are friendly towards Christians. It is only a small majority who are militant and violent towards Christians in India.
Anyway, you are right to say that this love affair is misplaced.
Derek
CS on Tue, April 08, 2008
Wendi:
“I get really bothered by the expectation (CS) that a Christian must take over any forum into which he/she has been invited, use the time to condemn the sin of every non-believer present and point out every falsehood they become aware of . . . or else they’ve somehow sold out. “
Go back an reread what I posted. I presented a what-if, and did not say that the people there would have to address everything to be true to the Gospel.
What I did say was that in this particular forum, I doubt that some aspects of our faith would be tolerated if brought up. Things like sin, righteousness, and Jesus Christ being the only way to God would likely be frowned upon as being “narrow-minded.” This makes it unequally yoked.
Suppose, for instance, that the Dalai Lama states that everyone is there because we all have different ways to get to the same eternal outcome. If I, as a Christian, do not respond to this, my silence could be perceived as tacit compliance. So, I say, “Although you are a great guy Tenzin, no, you are wrong here.” Think that would fly?
So, if we are not allowed to speak about any aspect of our faith without liberty, while others may make broad statements that may step onto our faith, yes, that constitutes being unequally yoked. Besides that, read the rest of the verses I cited in 2 Corinthians 6. It’s not just about the yoking, its about having fellowship with things untoward our faith.
—
CS
Brian L. on Tue, April 08, 2008
This isn’t quite as radical as what is being discussed here, but I have a local example.
Each year we have a “Living Christmas Tree.” It is a huge choral and orchestral concert, and the musical they select each year is very evangelistic in nature.
The three concerts draw huge crowds each year.
At each concert a local pastor is asked to serve as the “host” pastor, welcoming the audience, praying for the concert and the offering, and sharing for a few minutes about Christmas.
They try to rotate the pastor invitations, so oftentimes a non-evangelical will do the duties. And there are many mainline, non-evangelical, and even non-believing people in both the choir and orchestra.
The first year I was asked to be a host pastor, the head of the committee specifically asked me to share the gospel. You’d better believe that I jumped at the chance to preach the gospel to hundreds of people at one shot!
The next year this person told me that another pastor refused to participate because it was “too ecumenical.”
I was shocked that this pastor would throw away such a great opportunity. Now, however, I think that they probably would have used the opportunity to spread not the gospel of Jesus, but the gospel of KJV-only separatism.
Anyway, I have learned that often, the other pastors who share have really great things to share that enhance my own understanding, even if we disagree on that most fundamental issue of salvation.
Is this being unequally yoked? I don’t think so.
I don’t think I could share the stage with Mr. Lama or the rest, because I don’t think I could do a good enough job of drawing the distinctives in a way that promotes the gospel and still shows respect for those with whom I disagree, yet for whom Christ died.
I have sat on forums with others who disagree with my conservative, evangelical theology. And when the discourse is civil (as Scripture says we are to be), much can be accomplished for Christ.
Brian
Page 2 of 7 pages < 1 2 3 4 > Last »
Post a Comment