What Would Buddha Do?

[Bill Evans]

Hopefully, the thread title got your attention. I work in a small hospice office with a current staff of 12 people. I have identified a total of 4 workers who are clearly Christian. There are two who identify themselves as followers of the teachings of Buddha. One of them has had past experience in the Catholic, Lutheran, and Episcopal churches and has been disappointed. On 5/18, he came and visited the CotN service where I attend. He made it clear up front that he was doing this to broaden his horizons. Since the nearest Buddhist temple is nearly 2 hours away, he attends a Unitatian church in his community. He offered little comment on the service itself, but thanked me afterward for the invitation. On another occasion, he told me that he had plastic statues of Jesus, Buddha, and St Francis of Assisi on his bookshelf at home.

I found myself thinking during the service "What would Buddha do?" If my co-worker were to invite me to attend one of his services, I am thinking that I would visit to share in his experience. Anyone out there have any prior experience in working with Buddhism? And what about the mix with Unitarianism?

[Barb Bouldrey]

He would just sit there.

LOL

Barb

[Barb Bouldrey]

While traveling in North Carolina in April, I was scanning the radio channels to find the Christian stations. I was really shocked to come across a Buddhist program. We listened to it a while....music and words that sounded like blessings and prayer.

It was very interesting.

I believe all you can do is let the Light of Christ shine in your life to let them see the LIVING Christ makes a difference. If they ask questions, answer them

Barb

[Glenda Harvey]

I work with a woman who is Buhudist. What makes Budhist hard to witness to is their all roads lead to Heaven phylosophy, they do like to study other religions with the idea that all religions have something positive to offer. With Christianity they will study the teachings of Jesus but will not see Him as the only way to God.

[Billy Cox]

I found myself thinking during the service "What would Buddha do?" If my co-worker were to invite me to attend one of his services, I am thinking that I would visit to share in his experience. Anyone out there have any prior experience in working with Buddhism? And what about the mix with Unitarianism?

I don't have much experience with Buddhism or Buddhists, but I imagine that I would rather be on a desert island with a Buddhist than with a fundamentalist of any stripe.

I imagine that a Buddhist would have kinship with the Unitarians simply because neither one of them will try to evangelize the other.

[Greg Farra]

I don't have much experience with Buddhism or Buddhists, but I imagine that I would rather be on a desert island with a Buddhist than with a fundamentalist of any stripe.

I imagine that a Buddhist would have kinship with the Unitarians simply because neither one of them will try to evangelize the other.

Sorry, Billy, but even the Buddhists have their extemists. We just don't see it here. Sri Lanka has been terroized by them for years. I would guess that if one went to Asian countries, you would see some pretty rotten things done by 'good Buddhists', just as 'good Christians' have done some terrible things.

Of course, if I was on a desert island, I'd prefer someone with survivor skills. Their religion would be secondary at that point. If I had to be there with a fundamentalist, I'd prefer J. Vernon McGee myself.

[Susan Unger]

Hopefully, the thread title got your attention. I work in a small hospice office with a current staff of 12 people. I have identified a total of 4 workers who are clearly Christian. There are two who identify themselves as followers of the teachings of Buddha. One of them has had past experience in the Catholic, Lutheran, and Episcopal churches and has been disappointed. On 5/18, he came and visited the CotN service where I attend. He made it clear up front that he was doing this to broaden his horizons. Since the nearest Buddhist temple is nearly 2 hours away, he attends a Unitatian church in his community. He offered little comment on the service itself, but thanked me afterward for the invitation. On another occasion, he told me that he had plastic statues of Jesus, Buddha, and St Francis of Assisi on his bookshelf at home.

I found myself thinking during the service "What would Buddha do?" If my co-worker were to invite me to attend one of his services, I am thinking that I would visit to share in his experience. Anyone out there have any prior experience in working with Buddhism? And what about the mix with Unitarianism?

Where I used to live, one of the students at the school where I taught lost his father in a freak plane accident. His family attended the unitarian universalist church that a fellow teacher attended. After hearing the news of this guy's death, one of the teachers asked the UUC teacher if the kid had any kind of spiritual faith to lean on during this hard time. The UUC teacher said "I don't know...as that is not the purpose of our church." She said this in complete seriousness and sincerity. I was FLOORED!!! So I asked my pastor at the time if he could explain this to me. The best he could come up with was that the UUC believers congregate cuz they know there is something more than just us humans but don't know what. So, I guess the purpose of their church is to explore what might be out there but not to pinpoint a specific belief system to lean on. BTW, according to wikipedia's article on the UUC, they don't consider their denomination "christian" anymore.

Lots of prayer will be needed for you in witnessing to this person.

[Gina Stevenson]

Of course, if I was on a desert island, I'd prefer someone with survivor skills. Their religion would be secondary at that point. If I had to be there with a fundamentalist, I'd prefer J. Vernon McGee myself.


J Vernon McGee, eh? Remember him from radio long ago ... he was the "never pulls any punches" guy ... "tells it like it is" guy ... whose name I've used a time or two when having fun with Danny. You see, Dr. McGee used to tell how he met his wife at a friend's house for dinner [a set-up! ;)], and then waited until the 2nd date to ask her to marry him, b/c he "tho't she'd think [he] was too fast if he asked her on the first!" ... as if the 2nd wasn't fast, too?

So, since Danny very soon, too, I called him "Dr. McGee." :laughing

[Bob Evans]

Hopefully, the thread title got your attention. I work in a small hospice office with a current staff of 12 people. I have identified a total of 4 workers who are clearly Christian. There are two who identify themselves as followers of the teachings of Buddha. One of them has had past experience in the Catholic, Lutheran, and Episcopal churches and has been disappointed. On 5/18, he came and visited the CotN service where I attend. He made it clear up front that he was doing this to broaden his horizons. Since the nearest Buddhist temple is nearly 2 hours away, he attends a Unitatian church in his community. He offered little comment on the service itself, but thanked me afterward for the invitation. On another occasion, he told me that he had plastic statues of Jesus, Buddha, and St Francis of Assisi on his bookshelf at home.

I found myself thinking during the service "What would Buddha do?" If my co-worker were to invite me to attend one of his services, I am thinking that I would visit to share in his experience. Anyone out there have any prior experience in working with Buddhism? And what about the mix with Unitarianism?

Bill

If you like I will forward the request to Joe Knight.He has the most experience with any of this that I know.

Bob

[James Thurber]

I work in a small hospice office with a current staff of 12 people...There are two who identify themselves as followers of the teachings of Buddha... On another occasion, he told me that he had plastic statues of Jesus, Buddha, and St Francis of Assisi on his bookshelf at home.

I found myself thinking during the service "What would Buddha do?" If my co-worker were to invite me to attend one of his services, I am thinking that I would visit to share in his experience.

Hi Mr. Evans,

One of my co-workers has hosted a high school exchange student from Thailand this year. The student is Buddhist; and my co-worker and I have had several conversations about how to witness to Buddhists. She has taken him to church regularily and she has also taken him to the local Buddhist temple. After a year of his living in their home and comparing what he has learned in church with his Buddhism, his last comment to her a couple of weeks ago was Christianity is so full of hope. Buddhism has no hope, and is another one of Satan's traps. That is the bottom line.

Buddhism has several forms, a pure strain, one mixed with Hindu idolatry, and if you are dealing with an American Buddhist you are dealing with a romanticized form. In America, it has been romaniticized through television programs like "Kung Fu", music from groups like the Beatles, and books like "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". It may or may not be mixed with Hinduism. The romantic Bhuddism doesn't portray the dead-end hopelessness of non-existance. It kind of makes me wonder what kind of hospice worker these two are! :)

Perhaps a good place to start would be to ask him how God views idolatry, since he has several statues of Jesus, Buddha, etc.

The Unitarian-Universalists have become the leading ecumenical religion. They accept pretty much anything except genuine Jesus-is-the-only-Way Christianity in their ranks. As far as visiting his service to "share in his experience", read 2 John. You will do more harm to your spiritual life, than benefit his.

Here are a couple resources that can help you understand what you are dealing with. Taken in order they are:

First, look up Buddhism in a good encyclopedia (not Wikipedia). This will give you the basic ideas and terminology behind it.

Next, read Ravi Zacharias' book, "The Lotus and the Cross". Zacharias gives a good comparison between Jesus and Buddha's teachings. It will answer your question, "What would Buddha do?" And perhaps most importantly, provides clear descriptions of the two different endstates.

Third, Dig out a copy of the 2002 Nazarene Mission book, "Under the L: Mission Field Chicago". It has a chapter called "From Laos to Freedom". This chapter begins with a very interesting link between Satan and Buddhism. This is important because it throws the Buddhist end state described in "The Lotus and the Cross" in a different light - that being the Buddhist is deceived to think the ultimate end state is nothing, instead of hell.

Prayer is the first place to start. The Holy Spirit has to remove the scales from their eyes and earwax from their ears before they will react to the truth. The "hopelessness" of Buddha's teaching and "hope" of Jesus' is the next place to focus on. In the mean time, don't get sucked into Satan's trap yourself. :)

Jim

[Scott Hilton]

I don't have much experience with Buddhism or Buddhists, but I imagine that I would rather be on a desert island with a Buddhist than with a fundamentalist of any stripe.

I imagine that a Buddhist would have kinship with the Unitarians simply because neither one of them will try to evangelize the other.
You seem to be pretty fundamental in your dislike for fundamentalists.....just sayin'

[Cindi Hammons]

Of course, if I was on a desert island, I'd prefer someone with survivor skills. Their religion would be secondary at that point.

Bear Grills come to my mind.

[Billy Cox]

The Unitarian-Universalists have become the leading ecumenical religion. They accept pretty much anything except genuine Jesus-is-the-only-Way Christianity in their ranks.

For the record, the universalists reject any dogma that makes exclusive claims to salvation. So most Muslims and Jews would not be welcome either.

I hope this doesn't damage the mythology that today's evangelical protestant christians (especially those in the USA) are the most persecuted group in all of history. :eek:

[Billy Cox]

You seem to be pretty fundamental in your dislike for fundamentalists.....just sayin'

I've know and have known plenty of likable fundamentalists. I give most of them the benefit of the doubt that they just haven't encountered a more excellent way yet.

As for those who have encountered the truth firsthand yet choose fundamentalism, I think there must somewhere be a millstone engraved with their name.

Matthew 18:5-6

[Scott Hilton]

I've know and have known plenty of likable fundamentalists. I give most of them the benefit of the doubt that they just haven't encountered a more excellent way yet.

As for those who have encountered the truth firsthand yet choose fundamentalism, I think there must somewhere be a millstone engraved with their name.

Matthew 18:5-6

I think most of us know your feelings on what you call a fundamentalist or evangelical Billy, you have been pretty fundamental in your statements about them. I just find it funny that you have such an issue with the word "lost" being used in one breath, but use the words fundamentalists and evangelical in pretty much the same pattern in the next.

A fundamentalist is basically someone who is rigid in their principles, just saying that sometimes we all fit that bill and that island could be a lonely place for that buddhist depending on how someone may look at the definition of fundamentalist. :rolleyes:

blessings

[Wayne Paul]

This thread reminds me of a conversation I had in the January of 1965. I was in Japan attending a formal “Dining In” with the maritime branch of the Japanese Self Defense Force. During the meal a young Japanese Ensign asks me “how would Christianity improve our society?”

Being raised in the CotN the missionaries who visited my church had directly stated, or at least implied, they brought Christianity and civilization to the heathens. Well, here I was face to face with a young man who we would call a heathen due to his Shinto/Buddhist beliefs, who was definitely civilized and was concerned with his society, not his personal salvation.

How would you have responded? What are the social strengths of our beliefs? Are they adequately reflected in US culture?

[Paul Whitaker]

He would just sit there.

LOL

Barb

My thought was to just sit there with arms folded and that 'all knowing' expression on its face.

[James Thurber]

During the meal a young Japanese Ensign asks me “how would Christianity improve our society?”

Being raised in the CotN the missionaries who visited my church had directly stated, or at least implied, they brought Christianity and civilization to the heathens. Well, here I was face to face with a young man who we would call a heathen due to his Shinto/Buddhist beliefs, who was definitely civilized and was concerned with his society, not his personal salvation.

How would you have responded? What are the social strengths of our beliefs? Are they adequately reflected in US culture?

Hi Mr. Paul,

I have a copy of a paragraph from "Called Unto Holiness, vol. 1" in my Bible. It's a comment from Chief White Eagle about the effect that our early Nazarene forefathers (Jernigan and Martin) had on his tribe. Every so often I pull it out and reread it to remind me to stick to the basics. I think this is one of the most succinct descriptions of what Nazarenes are about.

Here's what White Eagle said,

"The white man come along and take our children away from us all the week and make them go to white man's school, read white man's books, live in white man's houses, eat like a white man with knife and fork, do housework and farm like a white man, but white man don't know that Indian has a black heart. He sprinkle water on his head, make him learn books with his head. He all the time doctor his head. But the Indian's head not bad - trouble in his heart.

Then come the Methodists and build big church, put up a big bell that we hear every Sunday morning. Mr. Simmons preach heap big sermon - say heap big words - Mrs. Simmons sing mighty fine song. Sing like a bird. Play piano good - fine music. Mr. Simmons don't know that Indian has black heart.

Then come Nazarenes - put up big brown tent - sing, clap their hands, look happy. Mr. Martin preach hot words. Tell Indian he no good - go to hell or be better - Indian feel bad. Come to mourner's bench, get on his knees, PRAY, CRY, shed tears - talk to great Spirit - soon he jump up, face shine - shake hands with everybody, look good. Be happy. Say Amen! Everybody cry. Then he go home - no more smoke a pipe, no more drink whiskey, no more eat mescal bean - read a Bible and pray. Good Indian - heart changed. Come on, Nazarenes, come on!"

Culture didn't impress White Eagle. Nazarenes don't bring culture to the table. We bring medicine for black hearts. That's our strength. That's the message I would have brought your Japanese friend.

As far as your question about Nazarene Holiness traits being reflected in U.S. culture...no, they are not. Holiness is, in fact, hostile to American culture.

Jim

[Dale Cozby]

I don't have much experience with Buddhism or Buddhists, but I imagine that I would rather be on a desert island with a Buddhist than with a fundamentalist of any stripe.

I imagine that a Buddhist would have kinship with the Unitarians simply because neither one of them will try to evangelize the other.

The Boxers were devout Buddhists. They took missionaries out and shot them, men women and children. A lot of Japanese were devout Buddhists and they did the same thing.

Anytime someone feels thier way of life threatened you will have some go violent..regardless of the religion. Would you want to be on an island with a fundamental Buddhist instead of a fundamental Baptist? :basic05

Buddhist violence:
In Myanmar
http://www.rohingya.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=101&Itemid=43
In Sri Lanka
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/slrv.htm

Didn't the Buddhists come up with Kung Fu, KArate, and Tai-Chi? Maybe you could get lessons.

[Billy Cox]

I think most of us know your feelings on what you call a fundamentalist or evangelical Billy, you have been pretty fundamental in your statements about them. I just find it funny that you have such an issue with the word "lost" being used in one breath, but use the words fundamentalists and evangelical in pretty much the same pattern in the next.

A fundamentalist is basically someone who is rigid in their principles, just saying that sometimes we all fit that bill and that island could be a lonely place for that buddhist depending on how someone may look at the definition of fundamentalist. :rolleyes:

blessings

Yes, it is one of the paradoxes that the most committed pluralist is just as rigid in their beliefs as a wild-eyed fundamentalist. My current faith project is find a way to extend generosity even to those who would consider my profession of faith punishable by crucifixion. Guess where I got that idea?? :basic05

[Billy Cox]

The Boxers were devout Buddhists. They took missionaries out and shot them, men women and children. A lot of Japanese were devout Buddhists and they did the same thing.


One of the tragedies of the human experience is that every faith has blood on its hands.

[Gina Stevenson]

I've know and have known plenty of likable fundamentalists.
Yeah, one couple in particular come to mind while reading this statement, Billy ... a couple who'd been rather friendly to me for several (well, many) years. Hadn't seen them in a good while when Danny & I ran into them somewhere the short while we were in Michigan. Tho't they seemed a bit, uh, "reserved(?)" for them. THEN, once Danny was gone & I was back here alone, it was strange ... ran into them & they were downright cool. 'Think they're so set in their fundy ways that they just couldn't take meeting Danny with his long hair (they're people we've heard speak of hair before, you see). Sad, huh?

[Wayne Paul]

Jim,

I don’t see the relevance of the Chief White Eagle story to the Japanese Ensign’s question. This was a formal dinner and I was one of the guests of the Japanese. This was dinner conversation.

The young man (I was 25 and I’m sure he was younger) would not have understood a story about the abuse of the American native people. He definitely would not have understood how the drinking, smoking, praying, crying, etc references fixed the problem.

To use these type stories as illustrations require the hearer to have pre-knowledge of Christian concepts.

[Scott Hilton]

Yes, it is one of the paradoxes that the most committed pluralist is just as rigid in their beliefs as a wild-eyed fundamentalist. My current faith project is find a way to extend generosity even to those who would consider my profession of faith punishable by crucifixion. Guess where I got that idea?? :basic05
Billy,

I am not sure how to take the first part (serious or in jest), but it is something I have noticed not only in your comments in the past but from others of the more emergent thought or should I say "anti-fundy" thought. Their disgust or maybe "frustration" from what they consider a fundamentalist view does come across in their words to me just as unloving as the words "lost" etc. come across to you. I see the term "fundy ways" used quite often and don't really see a difference of love in the words. To me, as someone who is probably not in any kind of "category", but likes to learn about different views, it is a turn off to me. To me it means a group of people have come up with a new way to use language to basically insult another group of people.

Same old story, we have a new and improved way and since our way is more "enlightened" or "progressive" the other ways were and are pointless and fruitless and some of them are on their way to a millstone (just not seeing the difference in love again). That is the message to me, as someone who doesn't have a long church history and hasn't had that history affect my views. I don't have a legalistic background to look back on, I don't have a liberal history to look back on, I have sin to look back on. So to be quite honest here, from my perspective the words being used to express a feeling against fundamentalist views are just as fruitless to me because they don't mean anything to me.

As an outsider on that view, the question that comes to my mind is if someone is so sure that some fundamentalists and/or evangelicals are on their way to a millstone, then what is a persons witness to that person they feel is going that way? Is calling them "fundies" the "evangelical" term? So I hope you see, I quite honestly hope you are serious in your statement because until then, it seems the "profession" is just a new wrapping to help divide instead of merge a nation of people who love Christ. Until that love is real and I see it in that movement towards all people, I am afraid I am sitting their with the Japanese fellow Wayne Paul was referring to and wondering what exactly it means to me and my society.

blessings

[Billy Cox]

Same old story, we have a new and improved way and since our way is more "enlightened" or "progressive" the other ways were and are pointless and fruitless and some of them are on their way to a millstone (just not seeing the difference in love again).

My post was an offhanded way saying that I am painfully aware of the danger of replacing one flavor of gross intolerance with another flavor of gross intolerance. Jesus' message was that we gain nothing by returning evil for evil.

You have astutely observed that I am not there yet. I perceive that I can still be a Nazarene as long as I am occasionally making some forward progress.


As an outsider on that view, the question that comes to my mind is if someone is so sure that some fundamentalists and/or evangelicals are on their way to a millstone, then what is a persons witness to that person they feel is going that way? Is calling them "fundies" the "evangelical" term?


I am convinced that witness is about 'living out loud' who we are in Christ, not doing what we think we have to do in order to close the sale. I did not say that fundamentalists are going to hell - that would be stupid. I do believe that religious leaders who see fundamentalism as a mechanism for controlling people and/or enriching themselves ARE in millstone territory because they don't believe what they are preaching.

As for my approach to fundamentalists, the best I can do generally is to keep the conversation alive and remind myself that the Holy Spirit is bigger than both of us.

[Scott Hilton]

Billy,

Thank you for that, I was honestly unsure of how to take a couple of the comments you had made, a misfortune of forum talk. It helps to see a face sometimes to know if something is said seriously or in jest. Your post clarified that for me and I am thankful to know that its not just me who sees some issues in how the language has been used (in general, not just at you here).

Many blessings to you Billy and may your heart be joyous
Scott

[Dale Cozby]

As for those who have encountered the truth firsthand yet choose fundamentalism, I think there must somewhere be a millstone engraved with their name.

What I get from this statement: Fundamentalists have rejected the truth in favor of a lie.
Therefore they are damned to hell as they lead others astray ffom the truth they rejected and as Jesus said, it would be better to drown them in the sea than suffer thier fate. Sort of like putting a rabid dog down out of mercy.

I think I have figured out your definition of fundamentalist after your many posts about them.
Billy Cox’s definition of fundamentalist:
Unlistening loudmouth, obnoxious, Bible-thumping, intolerant, close-minded, inflexible, people hating, hypocritical arrogant, judgmental self-righteous know-it-alls using force, mental coercion and intimidation to win converts to their false faith and control people through fear mongering and rule making.

I am so glad you aren’t judgmental like they are. Thanks for setting us straight as to the evil of those fundies. Let’s go rub a Budda statue now.

dictionary.com
fundamentlist: a movement in American Protestantism that arose in the early part of the 20th century in reaction to modernism and that stresses the infallibility of the Bible; strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles


I like your definition better. Really gives everyone a group to really hate.

[Billy Cox]

Billy Cox’s definition of fundamentalist:
Unlistening loudmouth, obnoxious, Bible-thumping, intolerant, close-minded, inflexible, people hating, hypocritical arrogant, judgmental self-righteous know-it-alls using force, mental coercion and intimidation to win converts to their false faith and control people through fear mongering and rule making.


That's not accurate, but hey, if the shoe fits...

[Greg Farra]

Hey! I'm not inflexible!

[James Thurber]

I don’t see the relevance of the Chief White Eagle story to the Japanese Ensign’s question...To use these type stories as illustrations require the hearer to have pre-knowledge of Christian concepts.

Hi Mr. Paul,

Your Japanese Ensign's question was, "How would Christianity improve our society?" Your closing question was, "What are the social strengths of Nazarene beliefs?" Both of you focused on social culture. My point was not to retell the White Eagle story to your Japanese friend. The point was this: European Culture was brought to White Eagle's tribe through both secular means and through the Methodist church, but White Eagle recognized that "culture", or the lack thereof, was not the tribe's main problem; their corrupt, wicked hearts were their real problem. The Nazarene's did not present a third attempt to bring social culture to the Indians, but instead they zeroed in on the real problem and presented the solution. The results of changed hearts and lives, not cultured, educated minds was what gained Chief White Eagle's praise. The same thing is true of your Japanese friend's society. They have culture already, you said so. They don't need whatever additional culture Nazarene's might bring. They have the same problem as you, me, and White Eagle's tribe have - a wicked heart at our core; and the solution is the same - not culture, but Christ. The answer to the Ensign's question is Christianity improves society by changing the hearts of believers.

It doesn't matter if the forum is a formal dinner or standing in a grocery store check out line, Christ can be presented anytime to anyone. As Paul told Timothy, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine" (2 Tim 4:2). And Paul preached to alot of people that didn't have any pre-knowledge of Christian concepts. :laughing

Jim

[Dale Cozby]

That's not accurate, but hey, if the shoe fits...
Hey what size shoe is that by the way? Please tell me not 13?:eek::laughing

Hey : "a movement in American Protestantism that arose in the early part of the 20th century in reaction to modernism"

That could also mean that emergents and fundies have something in common. a detest for modernism. Could it be that emergents and fundies are friends under the adage: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" :)

[Wayne Paul]

Hi Mr. Paul,

Your Japanese Ensign's question was, "How would Christianity improve our society?" Your closing question was, "What are the social strengths of Nazarene beliefs?" Both of you focused on social culture. My point was not to retell the White Eagle story to your Japanese friend. The point was this: European Culture was brought to White Eagle's tribe through both secular means and through the Methodist church, but White Eagle recognized that "culture", or the lack thereof, was not the tribe's main problem; their corrupt, wicked hearts were their real problem. The Nazarene's did not present a third attempt to bring social culture to the Indians, but instead they zeroed in on the real problem and presented the solution. The results of changed hearts and lives, not cultured, educated minds was what gained Chief White Eagle's praise. The same thing is true of your Japanese friend's society. They have culture already, you said so. They don't need whatever additional culture Nazarene's might bring. They have the same problem as you, me, and White Eagle's tribe have - a wicked heart at our core; and the solution is the same - not culture, but Christ. The answer to the Ensign's question is Christianity improves society by changing the hearts of believers.

It doesn't matter if the forum is a formal dinner or standing in a grocery store check out line, Christ can be presented anytime to anyone. As Paul told Timothy, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine" (2 Tim 4:2). And Paul preached to alot of people that didn't have any pre-knowledge of Christian concepts. :laughing

Jim

Jim,

I want to clarify a couple item. First, I didn't use the word Nazarene in my questions. Second, I am a Methodist.

Where in the original post does it say that I didn't give him my personal testimony? However, he was looking for more then something personal.

[William Hunter]

I suspect he will continue to lie in his grave.

[James Thurber]

Jim,

I want to clarify a couple item. First, I didn't use the word Nazarene in my questions. Second, I am a Methodist.

Where in the original post does it say that I didn't give him my personal testimony? However, he was looking for more then something personal.

Ahhh! Being a Nazerene website...I figured you were approaching from Naz perspective. :)

I think John Wesley, as Methodist, would still agree that changed hearts are required to change the culture. Both England and France had "culture" in Wesley's day, but his work on the hearts kept England from the distructive breakdown that would shortly plague France. I'm glad that you gave your personal testimony, but as far as society at large is concerned, the only thing Christianity brings to a group of people or nations is salt, light, and salvation. And none of those are always welcomed by the general public. :)

[Wayne Paul]

Ahhh! Being a Nazerene website...I figured you were approaching from Naz perspective. :)

I think John Wesley, as Methodist, would still agree that changed hearts are required to change the culture. Both England and France had "culture" in Wesley's day, but his work on the hearts kept England from the distructive breakdown that would shortly plague France.

You are correct, both England and France had cultures with a strong Christian histroy prior to John Wesley's time. This Christian pre-knowledge did not exist in Japan in 1965. This fact changes the contex of the questions.

This fact makes so much of what we say nothing but "theo-babble."

[Billy Cox]

Hey : "a movement in American Protestantism that arose in the early part of the 20th century in reaction to modernism"

By that definition, the 1st generation Nazarenes would be fundamentalists. I think the contemporary fundamentalists are harder to define although they coalesce around a view of the Bible as inerrant in every way whereas Nazarenes have never (officially) accepted that point of view.

That could also mean that emergents and fundies have something in common. a detest for modernism. Could it be that emergents and fundies are friends under the adage: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" :)

It is indeed likely that emerging Nazarenes would have more in common with Bresee than with Richard Taylor. Some have observed that the whole emergent phenomenon is really not that new...and as far as a rejection of modernism, they are right.