I think this may actually be the most controversial thing I ever say in this blog, but I just watched a movie that opened my eyes to something I've never seen before. I just finished watching Leap of Faith starring Steve Martin from the way back year of 1992. It is the story of a faith healer and his troupe of con-men, showing some of the backstage acts and how they create these "miracles." Now up until tonight, every time I saw Peter Popoff, Benny Hinn, or Don Stewart, my immediate reaction was "Satan." Not only do they resemble how you could conceivably picture Satan, but that they willingly trick and deceive people out of their money and belongings by faking miracles and wonderful sights. No more will I actually see them this way though, the movie really made me see something totally different about it, and in the end, one question remains. Does the end justify the means? These faith healers reach millions of people at a time, every time their infomercials come on, and every time they hold events in every city they visit. By seeing what they believe to be a miracle, millions of people find faith and religion because of it, and may contribute the the numbers of saved individuals. Now, what separates a Faith Healer from a Minister, a Priest, or a Pastor? I think the answer is very slight, in the end, all churches use separate means of deception, and I don't think that there really is one single guiltless church body in existence. In every body, there will be disagreement between each other, the Catholics will be molesters and condemners, the SDAs will be a cult, and the Mormons will be the ones that use their own story in their own book. The questions is: is it wrong to show something untrue to people, when you know that it will inspire faith? Now, I'm not saying that Popoff, Hinn, Stewart, or any other crooked church leaders are good people, because they profit greatly from all of these people that believe in them. But if you were to do this as a non-profit organization, would it be wrong? To put on a show, where you have inspirational music, where you show people the joys of what could happen with faith (because anything is possible with the Lord), and you make no promises of real miracles, but instead make it more like a play/skit/act, would it be right? Would you have to announce that no real miracles will be performed, to make it right? Or does the end (a multitude of new believers) justify the means (a show of "miracles" or the use of fear or claims of the truth)?
4 comments:
• Wow so much to respond on. First, you no not to over generalize or stereotype a group of people. Either it was do to the time of night in which you wrote this or you were trying to get peoples attention. All churches have not used some form of deception, Catholics aren’t all molester, and the Adventist church isn’t a cult. Yes, churches have people in them who deceive and the Adventist church isn’t completely free from molesters, we would be ignorant and neglectful to think so. The definition of cult- followers of an unorthodox, extremist, or false religion or sect who often live outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader. The Adventist church doesn’t fit this definition. We aren’t unorthodox or extremist at all because the doctrines of our church have been held by other faiths in the past (watch Keepers of the Flame), the way we worship is considered traditional when compared to other, and we are the most biblically based church in existence. Now to the subject of the movie you saw and Benny Hinn. There is no comparison between these man and the true body of Christ (no I’m not just referring to Adventist) There have been tons of charlatans throughout history.
• To say that this isn’t Satan I believe is inaccurate. Just because many of these “miracles” are fake doesn’t mean it’s not Satan orchestrating and leading these men to fake them. These “coming to Jesus” events don’t do anything of the majority of the people who have experienced them. Most of these people loose faith in any type of Christianity and completely turn their back on God; hence Satan gets what he wants. And those who don’t realized they’ve been tricked have a superficial faith that doesn’t in rich their lives. Also, these men give religion a bad name encouraging people who have never been introduced to Christ to never give Him a chance. Anyway you look at it Satan is getting his way when it comes to the hearts of thousands. But that’s for now, Christ will prevail and all those who have lost faith or haven’t have a chance to know Him will.
isn't it like the classic philosophical question (if a tree falls in the forest...)? i mean, if YOU believe what's happening around you, you still feel only the results of what you believe in regardless of the fact that the impetus was something conjured up by a shyster. the problem arises if/when the gig is up, and the believer realizes the deception...if you disillusion someone with your deception on such an important scale, i think it's a pretty big sin. that kind of thing makes people rationalize all sorts of things that lead them off the path of really finding their truth...that's a heinous thing to do to someone. there's more than just asking the first question involved....
lplasencia: You know that I know better, and it has nothing to do with the late hour. I was merely pointing out the fact that religions will always disagree with each other and have opinions (generally of a negative slant) about the people that attend them. I was not calling any church what I said, but merely giving examples of extreme opinions and over-generalizations.
You also did not answer my posed questions, merely stated that the existing faith healers' programs push people away. I'm not sure where you got you statistics to support what you claim, but I don't know if I will believe that the majority of people don't ever give religion a second chance because of a Coming to Christ meeting.
Anonymous: You have a great friendship with words. While I agree that to deceive someone on a grand scale would be sin, I posed a question at the end: If you do not claim miracles, and you give a demonstration of what faith can do in your life, no guarantees, is it still a sin? If you were to have people giving testimonials of how they had an aneurysm and were told they would not make it, then told they would lose function of their left half, and ended up with very little evidence that it ever occurred, or others that had similar miraculous events, would it be wrong? Where does the line lie, and what determines whether it has been crossed?
Nice blog.
Post a Comment