Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
(John 14:6 - ESV)
She has said it before, as we have documented, and now she is at it again, in official capacity, denying the supremacy and sufficiency of God’s saving work in Jesus Christ. By stating that there may be other roads to God, she is not lifting up the name of Christ, and so she is, in the very real sense of the word, anti-Christ, or against Christ as being all in all. You can say you are for Jesus all you want, but Jesus demands total allegiance. Now I will agree with her and all other apostates in this sense: As we said in our last sermon all roads do lead to God, but only ONE road will lead to God justifying us, all the other roads lead to God condemning us. Here are some of the details and a link you can follow to the video of the webcast.
The Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, USA, Katharine Jefferts Schori made another statement not supported by the Bible, saying that Jesus is the Christian way to God, but perhaps not the only way.
Schori told members of the Episcopal Church in a live webcast that for "Christians to assume that God may not act in other ways is to put God in a very small box."
Adding to her assertions, Schori remarked, "Our call is to be invited into conversation with people who have different understandings, and perhaps to see a larger vision of God in the midst of that."
Source: CBN News
Now God put Himself in that wonderful “box” called the Bible, and to deny the exclusivity of Christ, especially after Christ Himself declared it (John 14:6), as well as the Apostles (Acts 4:12 / 1 Timothy 2:5), is to diminish Jesus and His preeminence (Colossians 1:18). All this talk of God without the mention of Jesus Christ shows that she has not the One True God, for she dismisses the Savior, the ONLY savior, and places God in a role that He does not assume, one of saving people without His Son.
Now just think about it for a second: what is going on here? Think, think, think…when you say that perhaps there are other ways, what you are doing is diminishing the fact that Christ is what it is all about, you are saying that something less than all the people that will be saved will be saved by a knowledge and belief in Him, and this diminishes the glory of Christ for something else. Even if intended to be compassionate, our compassion for humanity is superceded, well it should be, it must be, superceded by a passion for the glory of God in Christ.
I ask you; does this type of statement give more glory to Christ, or less? This woman might answer that it gives more glory to God, not less, but indeed, it gives less glory to His Son, which is giving less glory to the true God. By not ascribing all glory to Christ, she is antichrist, and her denomination, if it accepts this declaration as given in an official speech, is also antichrist. She either does not know God, or she has turned away, I fear forever.
We have been covering the ECUSA and their descent into apostasy, and
here,
here,
here,
and here
are our previous updates from several months ago.
The Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, USA, Katharine Jefferts Schori made another statement not supported by the Bible, saying that Jesus is the Christian way to God, but perhaps not the only way.
Schori told members of the Episcopal Church in a live webcast that for "Christians to assume that God may not act in other ways is to put God in a very small box."
Adding to her assertions, Schori remarked, "Our call is to be invited into conversation with people who have different understandings, and perhaps to see a larger vision of God in the midst of that."
Source: CBN News
Now God put Himself in that wonderful “box” called the Bible, and to deny the exclusivity of Christ, especially after Christ Himself declared it (John 14:6), as well as the Apostles (Acts 4:12 / 1 Timothy 2:5), is to diminish Jesus and His preeminence (Colossians 1:18). All this talk of God without the mention of Jesus Christ shows that she has not the One True God, for she dismisses the Savior, the ONLY savior, and places God in a role that He does not assume, one of saving people without His Son.
Now just think about it for a second: what is going on here? Think, think, think…when you say that perhaps there are other ways, what you are doing is diminishing the fact that Christ is what it is all about, you are saying that something less than all the people that will be saved will be saved by a knowledge and belief in Him, and this diminishes the glory of Christ for something else. Even if intended to be compassionate, our compassion for humanity is superceded, well it should be, it must be, superceded by a passion for the glory of God in Christ.
I ask you; does this type of statement give more glory to Christ, or less? This woman might answer that it gives more glory to God, not less, but indeed, it gives less glory to His Son, which is giving less glory to the true God. By not ascribing all glory to Christ, she is antichrist, and her denomination, if it accepts this declaration as given in an official speech, is also antichrist. She either does not know God, or she has turned away, I fear forever.
We have been covering the ECUSA and their descent into apostasy, and
here,
here,
here,
and here
are our previous updates from several months ago.
12 comments:
Wow!...... I'll reply again this evening after listening to the clip. Thanks for being on top of this, JD.
She's so... enlightened (cough, cough).
1 John 2:19
Hebrews 1:1-2 - no other way does He reach people now than by Christ
Adding to her assertions, Schori remarked, "Our call is to be invited into conversation with people who have different understandings, and perhaps to see a larger vision of God in the midst of that."
Who says? Exactly where does she find this "call"? By what authority does she make this claim? What is her source of this information?
I know, I know, David, there are so many holes it can't even be considered swiss cheese...people may feel as if these words are "too strong" and that this post is "too condemning", but the gospel is at stake, and she is a primary player in the world of religious voices...this is the spirit of antichrist, she doesn't even temper her words by saying that these people will be saved by Christ even though they don't know it (ala CS Lewis and others, although I still know that is wrong as well), she is flat out saying that there are other ways to God...and Jesus says there are not...
I understand that some people would feel as if these words are too strong, but this is not the case. If we were talking about a little lost lamb, fine. But we are talking about someone who has been appointed shepherd. And she is not speaking about trivialities like dogs versus cats or chocolate versus vanilla; she is allowing people to believe that the formal position of the church allows salvation outside of Jesus Christ, and therefore, she is ushering people into the very gates of hell. Sorry, but how can I possibly be too harsh for such an atrocity?
Too strong? No way. Let's not forget, though, that it isn't just liberal Bible-denying, women-ordaining apostates that believe this. This isn't much different from statements made by evangelical icon Billy Graham.
J.D.,
You are not being to harsh. True Christians should not only affirm truth, but should refute heresy.
You have done that clearly and more leaders of true churches should speak out. Are you listening PCA?
I am encouraged by your energy and love for Christ and the gospel.
Wayne
I agree with Jazzy. So amen to Jazzy and to you, J.D.
JD, I work with a man whose family belongs to this denomination. His sister lives in Texas and her church is breaking away because of this very heresy. I guess some of the priests and pastors know the truth and are willing to make a stand. He just told me about his sister Thursday. Very timely post. Love and prayers, Mom
I do not find your admonitions at all harsh. I liken it to a parent/child realationship----if the parent is either too permissive or too strict the child doesn't feel loved and secure. I for one am pretty tired of spiritual leaders(?) who are too permissive and tell us what makes our flesh feel good....where's the security in that? Thanks for giving us both sides of the equation!
Post a Comment