I did not generalize. I specifically addressed my post to those who are judgmental. If the shoe fits, well.......
It's 0235 in the Eastern US as I sit down to write this response--make that 0236. It has been a
very long day. Out of the last 36 or so hours I have slept for only 2. My eldest daughter had a scheduled surgery to remove a congenital defect. She is doing quite well--all praise to God.
So, what I have to say, might be a bit more raw than the typical "Archangel" response. Perhaps it is ill-advised to write such a response when I am in the state of sleep deprivation that I am in. But, there are many things, Amy, that simply must be addressed.
1. The over-arching problem in this entire thread is that you are offended that some people down-play the experience of your friend.
While I'm sure his experience was, in fact, real and while I'm sure his experience led him to embrace the Gospel of Jesus Christ, his experience is not and will not ever be the Gospel. This is, simply put, something you need to come to terms with.
Many people do have deep and genuine experiences that drive them to Christ. Those experiences are nothing more and nothing less than a tool, perhaps in the hand of the Holy Spirit, to open one's heart to the Gospel.
It is of utmost importance for you, me, and everyone calling himself or herself a Christian to understand the difference between an experience that opens the door to the Gospel and the Gospel itself.
The Gospel has been and always will be
the field of engagement God uses in bringing people to Himself, not an experience. The Gospel is the Gospel. It, at the very least, must include the four following elements: 1.) God--who He is as Creator, Judge, etc.; 2.) Man--who we are as sinful rebels deserving of death at God's righteous wrath; 3.) Christ--who He is as Savior and Substitute; and 4.) Response--that we must respond favorably to the Gospel and embrace Christ, giving up our rebellion and becoming pardoned rebels.
No experience of mountain lions, run-away trains, terrorist attacks, cute and fuzzy bunnies, etc. will ever be the Gospel.
2. You are judging people because you perceive them to be judging you and/or your friend.
There are very learned people here from all sides of the theological spectrum and from all places along the Arminian-Calvinist continuum. Many, who don't agree on much, have agreed that your friend's experience--again, being a real and genuine experience--is not, in and of itself, the Gospel or a conversion, per se.
Rather than give evaluation on whether they may be right, you simply claim they are "judging" your friend. But--and here's the unfortunate part--you turn right around and judge them. In fact, you go so far as to say that one who says anything against your friend hasn't done much for the kingdom of God.
This is, simply, a hideously stupid thing to say--especially when you throw that statement at John of Japan, who has "let goods and kindred go" to serve Christ in a nation that is not his and to serve a people who are not his own--though the Japanese are generally regarded as a people who are most-hardened to the Gospel. John has gone to the "hard places" and he has done the "hard things." He deserves your admiration (and mine), not your accusation.
In your emotional effort to defend your friend, which is admirable, you have, unfortunately, allowed your heart to rule your mind. This is quite dangerous for anyone to do--the heart being more "subjective" and the mind being more "objective."
And though you have feigned taking the higher ground, the all-encompassing labeling of many learned and caring people as "judgmental" shows that you yourself are doing what you are accusing others of doing--judging. It is clear to us that, though you seemingly deny playing the part of Cinderella, the missing glass slipper is your size.
And, let's not forget, experience is not infallible. Is it possible your friend is in error? Sure. Just as it is possible that I am in error or you are in error. The scriptures are infallible, the Gospel is infallible. Experience is, by definition, subjective. If, indeed, your friend happens to be in error, what you have done, here, in this case, is elevated the subjective experience of a friend over the objective truth of scripture--no doubt a perilous problem.
So, in summary, I would greatly encourage you to find an objective "hill to die on" in the sacred text, not the experience(s) of a friend. I would also encourage you, when you have a brother, such as you have here, that you do not allow yourself to use him as a tool to demonstrate your lack of Christian charity for another group of brothers and sisters. It must be the goal of any believer--though we all fail at this from time to time--to demonstrate proper Christian love and deference to each other. In other words, you don't get to lambaste us here on the BB simply because you like your friend more than you like us. That is not how Christians are to treat one another.
Again, though you didn't listen the last time, a word to the wise should be sufficient. And, I would add, you still owe many (though not me) an apology--especially John of Japan.
The Archangel
