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 267
- (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.
fishon on Tue, April 08, 2008
Wendi,
I didn’t figure out the religion of my childrens teachers, nor did I go looking into their religion. I never did remove my children from a teacher’s influence. However, if it would have come to my attention that there might be a conflict….
You said: My sister-in-law is Buddhist. Her religion teaches selflessness and concern for others.
———I don’t doubt you. But Christianity/Bible teaches that, and Jesus is the great model. And don’t you know any Christians that model the same thing as your sister-in-law?
But I chase us in circles!
fishon
Leonard on Tue, April 08, 2008
Derek, Great question. I guess I think that way because that is not the purpose of the event. The purpose of the event is not for each faith to have an equal representation of faith but rather a joined effort in something bigger than their faith. Namely helping kids find spiritual answers and teaching compassion.
There is nothing bigger than my faith. I speak for myself here. Christianity does not thrive with homogenization. I think however the lighting of a tree, the honoring of a veteran, the commissioning of a park, the inauguration of a little league baseball season are entirely different. These are not agenda driven in such a way as to elevate all truth as equal and all roads pointing in the same direction.
fishon on Tue, April 08, 2008
Eric,
Yes, Ghandi did put some Christians to shame. But it wasn’t because he knew something because of his religion that Christianity did not teach. His religion did not offer or teach in a superior way anything as opposed to Christianity.
Yes, there is something we can learn from most anyone; however, in the realm of religion, why do we have to go, even encourage some to go and learn from say, the lama. For the lama has NOTHING new or unique to teach a Christian that the Bible does NOT teach or some of our great Christian teachers. WHAT MIGHT THAT BE, if you disagree with that statement?
The lama teaches things against God/Jesus just like the teachers of Baal did. Would you be honored to meet with the priest of Baal? Would you be honored to meet with the apostles of the Mormon church???
If you would NOT be honored to meet with the old prophets of Baal, but the lama, tell me the difference. Both practice[d] false religion.
I look forward to reading your reply.
fishon
Michelle A. on Tue, April 08, 2008
I don’t know how many of you live in the Pacific North West, but I do. The local TV stations have been showing commercials for this upcoming event in Seattle non-stop, and never once is anyone but the Dalai Lama ever mentioned. And now a very interesting commercial has cropped up….from the WEA…the Washington Educators Association….our Washington State public school system has placed a commercial on TV welcoming the Dalai Lama to Seattle.
Funny….I don’t remember them ever welcoming Billy Graham.
fishon on Tue, April 08, 2008
Leonard,
You said it very well. Several of our illustrious leaders and politicans seem to have a “love affair” with Hinduism and Buddhism, and the lama. Why? They are being fooled by the “masquerading angel of light.”
Plain and simple—the lama is a FALSE religion teacher. DOES ANYONE HERE ON THIS BLOG DISAGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT? Or do you not to not even touch that?
fishon
Jan on Tue, April 08, 2008
I think I’m the only one here so far, who has actually experienced the coming of the Dali Lama to their community.
“Peace and Compassion” being the by words and “His holiness is coming” repeated daily over and over in the community, in the schools,everywhere, was a thing to experience all right!
Would I stand and speak at this event? YES!!!
Because it would be my opportunity to share where true “holiness” “peace” and “compassion” comes from. Not from a man who consults his “war god” before he embarks on every peaceful endeavor.
Whatever opportunities I have to share Jesus I will take. This man is beyond dangerous. If you do a thourough investigation of Tibetan Buddism, you will be appalled, disgusted and afraid for our society who longs to embrace him.
Derek on Tue, April 08, 2008
Leonard,
Yeah I see where you are coming from. Even if an evangelical Christian was given liberty to speak as a Christian, there would be the subtle pressure to go along with the homogenization agenda of the organizers.
For me, I think it would be an awesome opportunity for the gospel. It would certainly be subversive, but isn’t gospel preaching always subversive? I guess if some one comes to me and says, “I am screwed up and I would Jesus to help me.” Then my preaching of the gospel to them wouldn’t really be subverting their intentions.
But outside of those rare encounters, isn’t most gospel preaching subversive? People have their own agenda and they come to Christ trying to meet some need for inner peace, fulfillment, satisfaction, happiness, the removal of guilt, etc. Their agenda is set, but the preaching of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus undermines that and reorients truth around God’s desires and purposes.
It would subvert their agenda, but doesn’t the gospel answer spiritual questions and teach children compassion?
Derek
Jim on Tue, April 08, 2008
I heard that the speakers all had to dress like the Dali, so would that make a difference? http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif
Imagine, if you were to accept and speak at this event you could open with a song: Well, hello, Dali! It’s so nice to have you back where you belong.” Oh, wait a minute, this man of peace is only able to practice freedom of speech and to speak openly in a country that is considered a warmongering country by many…interesting. Why isn’t he on the front lines in his own country with his message as are so many Christian missionaries? It appears this man of peace enjoys his safety among those who are considered to be causing the unrest in the rest of the world.
It’s funny that one can only have freedom of speech among those who have fought and died to defend this right. It appears his message is not relevant even from a practical point of view.
I love it when the critics of America and its Constitutional Bill of Rights enjoy the safety of its privileges, yet are so openly against it when they are in other parts of the world.
I would accept an invitation to speak, as long as they understood that my Christianity would not be watered down or side-stepped. I would not be hindered in speaking truth where it was part of the topic.
Randy Ehle on Tue, April 08, 2008
Allow me to respond to fishon’s statement and question, “the lama is a FALSE religion teacher. DOES ANYONE HERE ON THIS BLOG DISAGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT? “ I think I can safely say that no one on this blog would disagree with that statement.
Perhaps the more important question - or at least the more difficult one - is precisely what the direction Todd was going when he opened this discussion: What if you (Christian) were invited to speak at an event with a teacher of a false religion? How would you handle that? I don’t think there is a “right” answer (though judging from some of the previous comments, I may need to roll up my sleeves so they don’t get messed up when I’m crucified!). At one point in his ministry, Jesus said to be wise as a serpent and gentle as a dove; that’s probably pretty sound counsel for this discussion. Or how about, speak the truth in love.
Are we afraid that the advancement of the kingdom of God will be thwarted if Rob Bell and Doug Pagitt actually share the stage with a false teacher? I’m not. Will the advance of the kingdom be enhanced? I don’t know - but it won’t be thwarted…unless perhaps by those on “our side” who will throw stones at their brothers on the stage.
fishon on Tue, April 08, 2008
Randy,
Of course on the bigger scale, God’s kingdom will not be thwarted. However, The danger of Bell and Pagitt appearing on stage with the lama, as Christian ambassabors, gives even more legitimacy to lama/Buddhism as an equally viable religion as Christianity.
Will the kingdom be enhanced, you ask? Yea, just like it would be if a prophet of Baal was the featured, headlined, guru that everyone was coming to hear.
Wait a minute, I seem to remember Elijah going to a meeting with a few prophets of Baal. The only blood that will be spilled will be because someone gets in someone elses way to have their picture taken with lama. I bet ya that Bell and Pagitt smile real big. Lord, please don’t give us a picture of them bowing down and kissing lama’s hand.
Man, I had better just let this go. The more I think about it the more it rattles my cage.
fishon
Randy Ehle on Tue, April 08, 2008
Fishon, in all gentleness, I want to say that I think the best conclusion you’ve drawn is this: “Man, I had better just let this go.” The invitation is obviously not something you would accept, nor do you think it is right for any other believer to accept it. That’s fine, and I certainly don’t fault you for your conviction. But it’s also obvious that there are many others with a different opinion, which suggests to me that there really may not be a “right” or “wrong” answer to Todd’s questions.
Derek on Tue, April 08, 2008
I have tried to avoid responding to the posts of those (besides Leonard) who would have a problem speaking at this event. But I am really surprised that people are getting rattled over this issue. Why not join the stage with His Holiness (uh oh…there goes that love affair with Buddhism again) and preach the gospel? Here are my questions to those who would decline the invitation.
Is it really a biblical problem or is it a religious/cultural problem? I mean, have we too narrowly defined our idea of preaching the gospel to the point that we need a building, a big pulpit, and a room full of Christians in order to preach the gospel?
Does preaching the truth of the gospel mean that we must aways point out the falsity of other religions?
What is wrong with lovingly and truthfully proclaiming the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus without adding…oh yeah you are wrong and we are right?
Can’t we preach the truth that God has saved us from wrath, hell, and judgment without adding that His Holiness will suffer judgment if he doesn’t repent?
Jesus was ruthless in handing out judgment to his fellow Jews, but did he building his ministry around condemning the pagans?
Paul consistently condemned false teachers, the Gnostics, and the Judaizers who were calling themselves Christians, but did he lash out in attacks against the pagans?
Is Mars Hill in Acts 17 a paradigm for us to follow in consider this matter of preaching along side other religions? I know there have been some posts about Mars Hill, but I will have to re read them.
Elijah had his showdown on Mt. Carmel with the prophets of Baal, but again he wasn’t trying to disprove the reality of Baal, but to show the superiority of the LORD over all other Gods. He did mock them and their god, which I find funny, but was he purpose to condemn them or to proclaim the truth of the living God?
Does joining the platform with other religious leaders really constitute an endorsement of their views? This is really a matter of conscience. If your conscience would convict you then I can respect that, but I would ask, is your conscience shaped by Scripture or by a religious sub-culture of a narrowly defined view of preaching?
I do think this issue goes to the heart of the missional value in the emerging conversation. Some of the emerging stuff is troublesome, but this idea of engaging culture instead of fighting culture is an important issue.
Me thinks thou dost protest too much..
What thinkest thou?
Derek
fishon on Tue, April 08, 2008
Derek,
I am sucked back in. Randy, I just can’t help my self.
YOU: Is it really a biblical problem or is it a religious/cultural problem? I mean, have we too narrowly defined our idea of preaching the gospel to the point that we need a building, a big pulpit, and a room full of Christians in order to preach the gospel?
———-I won’t rehash some of what I have perviously said, but will answer this way; I would almost be inclined to be there if it was a debate about religions. But that is not the emphasis of the conference. Much of it is about the future of Children, and the other is about the lama. Read some of the info. It is all about lama. I dare say if you ask a Seattleite what religion the conference is about, they will say————-, you fill in the blank.
YOU: Does preaching the truth of the gospel mean that we must aways point out the falsity of other religions?
——-Certainly if they are setting at the same table and arguing for their religion.
YOU: What is wrong with lovingly and truthfully proclaiming the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus without adding…oh yeah you are wrong and we are right?
——-Nothing if you are alone with the person. And you know, Stephen would might have lived a long time if he hadn’t told those folks they were wrong. Stephen did say “You stiff-necked people with uncircumcised hearts….” He missed the notice that you shouldn’t tell them they are wrong. And, my goodness, do you really think Paul suffered so much because he didn’t convey that those he was preaching to were wrong in their religious assessments? Why do you think he was beaten, stoned, left for dead?
YOU: Jesus was ruthless in handing out judgment to his fellow Jews, but did he building his ministry around condemning the pagans?
——-No, Jesus handed out judgment on those who didn’t represent who he was correctly. He did not hand out judgment to ALL his fellow jews.
YOU: Elijah had his showdown on Mt. Carmel with the prophets of Baal, but again he wasn’t trying to disprove the reality of Baal, but to show the superiority of the LORD over all other Gods. He did mock them and their god, which I find funny, but was he purpose to condemn them or to proclaim the truth of the living God?
———Why of course he was trying to disprove the reality of Baal. And he did it by proving the superiority of God. You bet his purpose was to condemn them. What else would you call him killing all those prophets. If they could speak, they would cry, “Why are you condemning us, to death?”
YOU: Does joining the platform with other religious leaders really constitute an endorsement of their views? This is really a matter of conscience. If your conscience would convict you then I can respect that, but I would ask, is your conscience shaped by Scripture or by a religious sub-culture of a narrowly defined view of preaching?
——-Derek, the whole conference is based around who????? Who, pray tell, is getting TOP billing? Who are the majority of people going to listen to? Who’s picture adorns the advertizing? In this case, being on the platform with lama endorses him and his religion to the vast majority who will attend, and to those that the Buddhists will point to as part of THEIR conference.
——-My conscience is shaped by “Scripture.” If Stephen had decided to set down with Saul and have a conference, gee, he might have lived a long life. If the apostles had conferenced instead of making someone mad, they would have died old and natural deaths. But you know what? They ticked somebody off for not being politically correct.
And things like what Jesus told the Church at Pergamum give me my view of the matter.
YOU: Me thinks thou dost protest too much..
What thinkest thou?
——-I don’t know? You did respond, so maybe not.
By the way, I do NOT call for a stoning of you because I think you wrong. Heck, I would have stoned myself to death a long time ago if wrong got people stoned.
MAKE IT a great tomorrow.
fishon
Leonard on Tue, April 08, 2008
If I were invited to share the Gospel on a platform like this I would do it. but that is not the invitation here is it. The invitation is to help kids find spiritual answers and discover compassion.
Again this platform is seeking to combine people of faiths to join in a mission so large one single faith could not handle it. That is not true of my faith, it can handle it. Hinduism, the Dalai Lama has no answers for what ails youth today.
Jan on Tue, April 08, 2008
If the purpose is to “help kids find spiritual answers and compassion” who better to do that than those who have truth?
So, we let the Dali Lama do his stuff without any rebuttal? I think taking the opportunity to present the truth would be the right thing to do as long as you had the freedom to say what you wanted and didn’t water down taht truth.
I have to say I had many many interesting conversations with people who went to see the Dali Lama and came away dissulisioned because he had nothing to say.
But a lot of Christians refused to take those sharing opportunities, because they were afraid of being perceived as antagonists, or as supporters. Out of the 8 evangelical churches in our community, only 2 would even prayer walk (one was our church).
It shocked me how few pastors were willing to stand up and be counted for Christianity.
So, I unfortunately read these posts with a bit of skeptism. How many of the pastors represented here, are just afraid to stand up with the Dali Lama and proclaim truth? (not accusing anyone, just wondering) There are a lot of pastors who in the name of peace just prefer to blend in and let him pass through and do his stuff.
This man is leading thousands of people astray. When are we going to be willing to stand up against him and what he says?
And how can we possibly criticize those who are willing to do so. I think it’s appalling that some will actually say that these pastors are lumped in with the Dali Lama because they’ve accepted the invitation.
Page 3 of 7 pages < 1 2 3 4 5 > Last »
Post a Comment