Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2015 21:51:06 GMT
I ran across this today. It's a brief summary of an article in the New Yorker about Fred Phelps' granddaughter. The author has a link to the much longer article in the New Yorker. Some excerpts that sounded just like the PRC (IMHO): "My only run-in with Westboro-type folks was in the late 1990’s at a Billy Graham crusade. They were protesting Graham’s message of God’s loving invitation to sinners. A family friend who had once belonged to our church was part of the group now condemning us as compromisers. It was the first time I saw, up close, how cults target people in vibrant Christian fellowships and slowly isolate them until any independence of thought is condemned as rebellion." "There was no good news in her “church,” only a distorted version of God’s Law and a gleeful presentation of God’s judgment. Her mother summed up the Bible in three words: “Obey. Obey. Obey.”" "This is works-based salvation amped up to the highest degree, a perverse moralism that confuses obedience with goodness, and submission with love. The flip side of the focus on “obedience” is how any hint of questioning was condemned as sin." "Westboro’s theological contagion originated in a version of hyper-Calvinism and then mutated into an apocalyptic urgency that narrowed the “faithful” to the small number of people associated with Phelps’ family. Christians were wrong to emphasize God’s love, Fred Phelps preached. God didn’t love the world; He hated unrepentant sinners and the political leaders who glorified sin and who permitted immorality..." "There is simply no good news in Westboro’s celebration of God’s judgment. Where is the gospel in tweeting casual comments of judgment, along with celebrations of horrible events?" blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/trevinwax/2015/12/08/how-twitter-helped-fred-phelps-granddaughter-walk-away-from-westboro/ |
|
|
|
Post by freefromprc on Dec 9, 2015 2:37:44 GMT
I ran across this today. It's a brief summary of an article in the New Yorker about Fred Phelps' granddaughter. The author has a link to the much longer article in the New Yorker. Some excerpts that sounded just like the PRC (IMHO): "My only run-in with Westboro-type folks was in the late 1990’s at a Billy Graham crusade. They were protesting Graham’s message of God’s loving invitation to sinners. A family friend who had once belonged to our church was part of the group now condemning us as compromisers. It was the first time I saw, up close, how cults target people in vibrant Christian fellowships and slowly isolate them until any independence of thought is condemned as rebellion."
"There was no good news in her “church,” only a distorted version of God’s Law and a gleeful presentation of God’s judgment. Her mother summed up the Bible in three words: “Obey. Obey. Obey.”" "This is works-based salvation amped up to the highest degree, a perverse moralism that confuses obedience with goodness, and submission with love. The flip side of the focus on “obedience” is how any hint of questioning was condemned as sin." "Westboro’s theological contagion originated in a version of hyper-Calvinism and then mutated into an apocalyptic urgency that narrowed the “faithful” to the small number of people associated with Phelps’ family. Christians were wrong to emphasize God’s love, Fred Phelps preached. God didn’t love the world; He hated unrepentant sinners and the political leaders who glorified sin and who permitted immorality..." "There is simply no good news in Westboro’s celebration of God’s judgment. Where is the gospel in tweeting casual comments of judgment, along with celebrations of horrible events?" blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/trevinwax/2015/12/08/how-twitter-helped-fred-phelps-granddaughter-walk-away-from-westboro/Great post. I had to bold a few things that I thought were key. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2015 11:36:16 GMT
Glad I took time to read the article. Similarities I saw :
*Hyper Calvinism
*Family Influence (Over Influence)" a version of hyper-Calvinism and then mutated into an apocalyptic urgency that narrowed the “faithful” to the small number of people associated with Phelps’ family."
*Lack of Love for others outside "Christians were wrong to emphasize God’s love, Fred Phelps preached. God didn’t love the world;"
*"When the god you worship is a fiery deity who hates all the same sinners you hate, it is natural to see those sinners as somehow subhuman, worthless and disgusting. " The article goes on to describe her parents reaction to god's righteous judgement of some wicked person. I think we have another thread on that here referencing a SB article.
I especially appreciated the authors conclusion. I know I've been guilty of it, and have seen it demonstrated many times, even on this forum. When Phelps-Roper left the cult, she didn't turn to Jesus. She instead again used the Bible to win arguments etc., only now her target had changed. Now she targeted the group she left. There has to be a balance here for those of us who have left, and have stayed with Christianity. The decision to be argumentative is probably the easiest one for us to turn to.... I'd rather my legacy be a true gospel legacy, centered on love.
|
|
|
|
Post by freefromprc on Dec 15, 2015 23:58:25 GMT
Glad I took time to read the article. Similarities I saw : *Hyper Calvinism *Family Influence (Over Influence)" a version of hyper-Calvinism and then mutated into an apocalyptic urgency that narrowed the “faithful” to the small number of people associated with Phelps’ family." *Lack of Love for others outside "Christians were wrong to emphasize God’s love, Fred Phelps preached. God didn’t love the world;" *"When the god you worship is a fiery deity who hates all the same sinners you hate, it is natural to see those sinners as somehow subhuman, worthless and disgusting. " The article goes on to describe her parents reaction to god's righteous judgement of some wicked person. I think we have another thread on that here referencing a SB article. I especially appreciated the authors conclusion. I know I've been guilty of it, and have seen it demonstrated many times, even on this forum. When Phelps-Roper left the cult, she didn't turn to Jesus. She instead again used the Bible to win arguments etc., only now her target had changed. Now she targeted the group she left. There has to be a balance here for those of us who have left, and have stayed with Christianity. The decision to be argumentative is probably the easiest one for us to turn to.... I'd rather my legacy be a true gospel legacy, centered on love. It is hard to not want to hold the feet of the PR to the fire. I also don't think they should get away with what they have done. Not to say we need to be vindictive, rather simply expose them for what they are so that others know the truth about them. They have gotten away with it since 1924. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2015 11:43:34 GMT
There is a fine line there, in my opinion. Are they responsible - YES. Are we the ones required to bring judgement - NO. Should we be open about our experiences in order to help/save/comfort others? ABSOLUTELY. I guess for me it comes down to motive. Why am I doing this? Do I think I am their judge? (Vengance is mine.....?)
|
|
|
|
Post by cannalily on Dec 16, 2015 20:24:30 GMT
There is a fine line there, in my opinion. Are they responsible - YES. Are we the ones required to bring judgement - NO. Should we be open about our experiences in order to help/save/comfort others? ABSOLUTELY. I guess for me it comes down to motive. Why am I doing this? Do I think I am their judge? (Vengance is mine.....?) At least for me, this has NOTHING to do with vengeance. It has everything to do with an organization that continues to screw over people's lives with little or NO remorse for their actions, all in the name of "god". Replace "god" with "Allah", and it's the SAME mindset. These people are completely delusional, to the point of going against their own flesh and blood because they think "they are right". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2015 12:47:54 GMT
Glad I took time to read the article. Similarities I saw : *Hyper Calvinism *Family Influence (Over Influence)" a version of hyper-Calvinism and then mutated into an apocalyptic urgency that narrowed the “faithful” to the small number of people associated with Phelps’ family." *Lack of Love for others outside "Christians were wrong to emphasize God’s love, Fred Phelps preached. God didn’t love the world;" *"When the god you worship is a fiery deity who hates all the same sinners you hate, it is natural to see those sinners as somehow subhuman, worthless and disgusting. " The article goes on to describe her parents reaction to god's righteous judgement of some wicked person. I think we have another thread on that here referencing a SB article. I especially appreciated the authors conclusion. I know I've been guilty of it, and have seen it demonstrated many times, even on this forum. When Phelps-Roper left the cult, she didn't turn to Jesus. She instead again used the Bible to win arguments etc., only now her target had changed. Now she targeted the group she left. There has to be a balance here for those of us who have left, and have stayed with Christianity. The decision to be argumentative is probably the easiest one for us to turn to.... I'd rather my legacy be a true gospel legacy, centered on love. As the article stated, when she left Westboro, she did not walk toward genuine Christianity. This is tragic, but not surprising. Christian sects/cults are more dangerous (in my opinion) than non-Christian cults because they use the very words of genuine Christianity, then twist and distort those words into meaning something very different. It seems that she was not able to look at Westboro's teachings and say "that's not the Christian faith", but rather has rejected Christianity together with Westboro. I'm not surprised if/when people leave the PRC, they might also reject genuine Christianity just as she did. The preaching/teaching I heard in the PRC used the very words of genuine Christianity, but then twisted and distorted those words to mean something very different. Like Westboro, I believe the PRC has strayed from true Christianity and has a false gospel. What the PRC teaches is not genuine Christianity - this needs to be stated loud and clear, both to those thinking of leaving and also to anyone thinking of joining the PRC. Reject false teaching, but pursue Christ and the God of the Bible. Don't let PRC teaching be a stumbling block to faith in Christ. |
|
seeker
Seminary Student
Posts: 351 
|
Post by seeker on Dec 22, 2015 1:54:00 GMT
There is a fine line there, in my opinion. Are they responsible - YES. Are we the ones required to bring judgement - NO. Should we be open about our experiences in order to help/save/comfort others? ABSOLUTELY. I guess for me it comes down to motive. Why am I doing this? Do I think I am their judge? (Vengance is mine.....?) There is a subtle difference between exposure and vengeance. This site will help a lot of people regardless of its tone. I think it is to be expected that people would be angry if they believe they have been mislead and deceived by the PRC. |
|
