Against Christian Relativism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Montie_Claunch
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Montie_Claunch

Guest
How would one defend against Christian Relavitism? I am talking to a person who feels that that feels that certain things are irrelvant to salvation and that God would lead people to a church he feels best suits the persons personality (Like one person might be called to be SDA while another is called to be Mormon, ect.). Being that the person is protestant, does anyone know how I could do this with scripture? Thanks and God bless.
 
Jesus’ prayer “that they may be one” is a good defense, I think. John 17, I think.

JPII wrote about it in “Et Unum Sint.” Check it out.
 
Montie - Prodigal has provided the same answer I propose, and I will expand on it just a bit. The reference he mentioned is John 17: 20-23. In those verses, Jesus prays that “they may be one as we are one.” I do not believe any protestant Christian would argue with the fact that Jesus and the Father are perfectly one; with all its denominations, the church on earth is far from the perfect oneness I believe Jesus had in mind.

Chuck
 
Except, the “that they may be one”, used alone, tends to be a support for relativism, as it is a happy claim of relativists that they are more willing to recognize a unity between disparate parties, even those that have no basis for unity, than those who support the objective realism crucial in religious Christianity. Under relativism; Catholics, Baptists, Mormons, and even Buddhists are as “one” as the scriptures require due to the basic indifferentism which springs from relativism, despite the objective differences between them. For a relativist, a compassionate Buddhist is “more” Christian than the curmudgeony Catholic (like me). Without other supports, this scripture will only further convince a relativist that the various doctrines and dogmas which “cause division” are both unnecessisary and even detrimental to their perception of Christ’s clear teaching.

Yes, the teaching supports why a single authority is necessary for us fractitious humans, but itself does not really help against relativists (who often will find the concept of “necessary authority” near unfathomable because of their underlying assumptions); something else is needed to first lay the groundwork for realism in lieu of relativism. Jesus’s teaching that He “is the Way, the Truth, and the Life” is more useful, imho, to establishing an objective reality argument which denies the would be “Christian” relativist a basis for their position.
 
No to be a contrarian, but how do we know that God isn’t leading someone to a Protestant church as a step along the way? Couldn’t that be an opportunity to do some good, grow in faith, help someone that really needs it, and further prepare that person for further growth in their faith and love of Christ?

I always felt that’s why the best evangelization we could do was LIVE a life like Christ, and leave the actual conversion to the Holy Spirit. Only HE knows what the plan is for the person (and if they are willingly accepting it!)
 
A rational argument is: God can not contradict himself and therefore, He can not lead someone in to error. Some of the groups mentioned have diametrically opposed views. One of these view is right and the other wrong. Both views can’t be true.

He can lead someone from a life view that is in more error to less error such as secularism to protestantism. But He does not lead the other way.
 
Ah, but a conversion is a long, life long, process, and we certainly do not have the wisdom necessary to contradict God. As is aptly said, “He moves in mysterious ways”, and so what we consider the simple direct path cannot always be taken for those of us who had a lot of “excess baggage” to get rid of first.

Take me for example. I was raised as your typical no-church protestant. That is, one (christian-protestant) church is essentially as good as another. Helps I went to a lutheran school during the week, and to a evangelical church on sundays, as well as visiting friends’ churches on occasion along the way.

At anyrate, while I always stove to keep God in center focus, it took a very long and round-about road to get me into Catholicism, which included occultism, which led into mormonism, which culminated in masonry, and finally to “Rome”. While none of these steps were “ideal”, there were very important things that I both had to let go of, and to take hold of, before Catholicism was even a valid option. These steps were necessary for my personal journey into the Faith.

For example, thanks to my religious upbringing, I had no concept of a need for ecclisiastical “authority” or preisthoods. Like many, the Holy Spirit was the only “authority” necessary for a Christian. Unfortunately, in seeking better means of quieting myself in order to listen to the Holy Spirit, I fell into the occultist trap. While happily “spiritual”, my occult worldveiw forced me to actually look past the empty intolerance and prejudice against mormonism, and I found a “christian” church that actually had room for both occultism (not to say it is welcomed by your average mromon) and the idea that we are our own authorities in regards to the Gospel, thanks to personal revelation, ect. However, my years in the mormon church helped to pull me out of my directly occultic dealings, and started to form the question and awareness of the necessity for a valid preisthood. This awareness did not culminate into a postitive determination until after becoming a York Rite Mason. Thanks, ironically, to two relativistic ideologies (mormon and masonic), I discovered that I was both a realist, and that the Gospel requires an objective reality. Coupled with the full realization of the real requirement for an objective “authority” to perform the scriptural mandates of teaching doctrine and correcting error, I shed the last of my protestant baggage, and was able to finally look at the Catholic Church for the first time as it is, rather than as all my prior experience told me it was.

Is it a cure-all for all protestants like I was? Would I ever tell someone to join the lds corporation so that they can eventually become Catholics? No. But neither can I deny the necessary (thanks to my own peculiar brand of stubborness and spiritual blindness) of the path I took in order to finally arrive at the straight and narrow. Yes, I humbly recognize there were many cases where I went in the opposite direction, but in those cases it was necessary to show me the error of the path. I wish I could say I was wise enough not to have ever needed to be a mormon, but I cannot. All I can say is, the Most Blessed and Holy Trinity was guiding me as much as I would allow to get me to where I needed to be. Would it have been easier to just go from basic american -protestant striagt to Catholic? Certainly, after all, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. But, again, I was too blind in certain areas of the Gospel, and too disordered in others to make such a direct route.

My time in the refining fire needed a little more time and process to bring out the gold, is all. And it is still an ongoing process, its just that positive progress is finally being made. 😃
 
Put another way;

It is like those puzzles that require many steps, many of them seemingly counter-productive, before being able to set the puzzle out solved.

One takes a positive step in a particular direction, because there is something needed to be learned, unfortunately there is also something else that is learned that must be abandoned in the next step in the process, which has yet more good things and a few less “bad” things to unlearn.

God can see far beyond our expectations, and what appears to us to be “contradiction” will turn out in the end not to be so.

You cannot solve even one face of a Rubic’s Cube without moving the colors you are seeking away from the place you want them to be on occasion.

It would be nice that we were all so wise as to follow the simple path to salvation. Unfortunately in my case, such was not possible.

Recognizing the full reality that Salvation is not a simple “cut and dried” or even linear process does not validly support relativism. It is unfortunate that relativists, on the one hand, suggest that because we start in different places there is no S&N that gets us all to Heaven, just face “east” and march; while on the other, equally simplistic thought tells us that despite each of us starting in different locations, we all must follow the same progressively linear path to get to the S&N.
 
Is it a cure-all for all protestants like I was? Would I ever tell someone to join the lds corporation so that they can eventually become Catholics? No. But neither can I deny the necessary (thanks to my own peculiar brand of stubborness and spiritual blindness) of the path I took in order to finally arrive at the straight and narrow. Yes, I humbly recognize there were many cases where I went in the opposite direction, but in those cases it was necessary to show me the error of the path. I wish I could say I was wise enough not to have ever needed to be a mormon, but I cannot. All I can say is, the Most Blessed and Holy Trinity was guiding me as much as I would allow to get me to where I needed to be. Would it have been easier to just go from basic american -protestant striagt to Catholic? Certainly, after all, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. But, again, I was too blind in certain areas of the Gospel, and too disordered in others to make such a direct route.
Thanks for sharing, your faith jorney is very inspiring.

I still don’t think the Holy Spirit guided you in to error but allowed you to fall further in to error for your own good. Ultimately, it was your choice coupled with grace from God that allowed you to see your way along.

God allows evil in order to bring about a greater good but God does not will evil. I think the same thing goes for your journey except I would not call our protestant brothers and sisters evil but rather, he allowed to to stray further from the truth in order for you to be able to recognize where the fullness of truth is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top