A Conversion Story

[whag]

Some form of knowledge that can be transmitted.

Failing that, an obvious, physically observable change, such as the regrowth of an amputated limb, or something of that sort. Supposedly, signs like this were given in the past, yet today some Christians state that because the Bible is "complete," the signs have stopped. It seems ... convenient.

I like how Paine put it. Revelation is only revelation to the hearer and hearsay to everyone told thereafter.

Perhaps it's also convenient to interpret divine encounters as only given to those who'd never reject such signs anyway. My position is that if one is already predisposed to accept dreams and burning bosoms as evidence, then why bother giving them such signs? The predisposition to faith would be sufficient to seal one's salvation.

I don't find these stories compelling as evangelism tools, as all religions have adherents with powerful personal encounter stories. It's best to not use them as data to persuade since Christians aren't the only people that experience them.

[Outis]

I don't find these stories compelling as evangelism tools, as all religions have adherents with powerful personal encounter stories. It's best to not use them as data to persuade since Christians aren't the only people that experience them.

Agreed, but the primary historical purpose of these stories is not as conversion tools: they are primarily to re-affirm to those already converted. Those who use them as proseletization tools are going against the historical purpose.

[seer]

What's standard punishment compared to more severe punishment?

I will leave that to God.

It seems to me that a predisposition to believe (people like you who accept dreams and persistent dread as evidence) wouldn't require sensory intervention in the first place. Those with a skeptical disposition would seem to be most in need of strong signs.

I'm not sure if that is the case. There are probably degrees of skepticism, more to over come in specific cases. Even though Kirsten Powers, CS Lewis, myself and others were very reluctant converts I suspect that God knew it would stick with us. Either that or the Calvinists are correct.

[firstfloor]

Kirsten Powers is a noted liberal and former atheist. It is story that somewhat mirrors my own conversion experience. It is at least an interesting read.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/...s.html?start=2

If Jesus came to her it was an experience no less significant than Paul’s and she should have her testimony appended to the new edition of the Bible. Why not? Powers’ Epistle to the Americans could slip in somewhere between Hebrews and James.

[Cow Poke]

If Jesus came to her it was an experience no less significant than Paul’s and she should have her testimony appended to the new edition of the Bible. Why not? Powers’ Epistle to the Americans could slip in somewhere between Hebrews and James.

The experience she claims comes nowhere near the experience of Saul on the Damascus road described in the Bible. You really overshot the runway on this.

[firstfloor]

The experience she claims comes nowhere near the experience of Saul on the Damascus road described in the Bible. You really overshot the runway on this.

I appreciate that Jesus didn’t say anything very profound but surely the visitation must be a sign of Kirsten Powers’ importance and divine approval of her evangelizing journalism. Perhaps a by-line like “Approved by Jesus” would not go amiss.

[robrecht]

... and burning bosoms ...

Burning bosoms?

[Cow Poke]

I appreciate that Jesus didn’t say anything very profound but surely the visitation must be a sign of Kirsten Powers’ importance and divine approval of her evangelizing journalism. Perhaps a by-line like “Approved by Jesus” would not go amiss.

Wow.... you really haven't read the account of Saul's conversion for yourself, have you? And I suspect you really haven't read (with any appreciable comprehension) the story of Kirsten's conversion. Not even close. I'll be happy to cover the differences, if you're interested in anything more than childish and petty criticism.

[Cow Poke]

Burning bosoms?

Mrs. Doubtfire.

[robrecht]

A nice story of someone coming to belief in something she had previously discounted and now found very fulfilling. I thought it was funny about how she feared that Christians would try to convert her to being Republican.

[firstfloor]

Wow.... you really haven't read the account of Saul's conversion for yourself, have you? And I suspect you really haven't read (with any appreciable comprehension) the story of Kirsten's conversion. Not even close. I'll be happy to cover the differences, if you're interested in anything more than childish and petty criticism.

I have just been reading Acts 9. Even with the involvement of Ananias it is quite a simple story. Jesus says surprising little (Hello and go). I am definitely interested in what you have to say about it. I think Kirsten’s story is just as elaborate. And she is a writer, like Paul. I think there are strong parallels.

[Cow Poke]

I have just been reading Acts 9. Even with the involvement of Ananias it is quite a simple story. Jesus says surprising little (Hello and go). I am definitely interested in what you have to say about it. I think Kirsten’s story is just as elaborate. And she is a writer, like Paul. I think there are strong parallels.

"Hello and go"? That's what you got from the Acts 9 account? Or do you find it necessary to misrepresent scripture to support your claim?

Source: Acts 9[4

]*He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”[5]*“Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. [6]*“Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

© Copyright Original Source

I have to believe you're just playing games, and pretending interest.

Saul was blinded for three days - he had been a Christian killer very actively working against Christianity - it was a dramatic physical encounter, not a "dream" or a "vision".

To compare that to Kirsten's account is just plain goofy.

[firstfloor]

"Hello and go"? That's what you got from the Acts 9 account? Or do you find it necessary to misrepresent scripture to support your claim?

Source: Acts 9[4

]*He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”[5]*“Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. [6]*“Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

© Copyright Original Source

I have to believe you're just playing games, and pretending interest.
Saul was blinded for three days - he had been a Christian killer very actively working against Christianity - it was a dramatic physical encounter, not a "dream" or a "vision".
To compare that to Kirsten's account is just plain goofy.

Paul was blinded and Kirsten was traumatized for several days at least. I think if you were to remove Paul’s story from its special place in the Bible and put him in a modern setting beside Kirsten you would be hard pushed to say which was the more authentic experience and consequently, whose wisdom we should pay more attention to.

I know this discourse seems to you an outrageous wind up but I think it is interesting to reflect on how we deal with contemporary claims of this sort. (I think it is because we worship the book.)

[OingoBoingo]

I don't even understand the argument. Every person who has a vision or experience of Jesus must append their experience to the Bible? Huh?

There have been thousands, maybe millions, of people who have claimed to have seen or experienced Jesus after his resurrection, going all the way back to the first century, and their writings haven't been canonized. Having had an experience of Jesus, in of itself, doesn't seem to be the reason for canonization. If I'm remembering correctly, the reason for canonization usually had to do with things like Apostolic authority, closeness to the events of the 1st century, content, and occasion of the writing, etc.

[seer]

I tried to write off the experience as misfiring synapses, but I couldn't shake it. When I returned to New York a few days later, I was lost. I suddenly felt God everywhere and it was terrifying. More important, it was unwelcome. It felt like an invasion. I started to fear I was going crazy.

In the late summer and early Autumn of 1990 I had three of these experiences - powerful, terrifying and wonderful. At one point I thought this "presence" was going to kill me - I begged Him/it to stop. At that point I had no knowledge of the experience of a CS Lewis or others who went through this, so I too was questioning my sanity. I was 37 years old at the time, and like most human beings I had run the gambit of emotional experiences - good and bad. But this was nothing like any experience I had in the past, it was completely different. I don't believe that one could understand this encounter unless one experienced it themselves. It was wholly foreign to any past reference. So the skeptic would have to reduce this to a mere psychological event, that is understandable, but for the person who had this overwhelming "sense" that reduction just doesn't ring true.