www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Iranian Imam Receives Christ

Iranian Imam Receives Christ Via Satellite TV, Escapes Country

�God is shaking the foundation of Islam in Iran,� Safa said. �We have been praying for some of the main government officials to come to Christ and God is answering us,� he noted. �I pray God will open more doors for us to send the gospel to the Middle East.�

http://www.spcm.org/Journal/spip.php?article7247

Praise God that he has converted!

The TV station was TBN and Pat Robertson does televise on that network so its possible he is making some inroads there. They also have their fair share of word faith movement (name it and claim it prosperity junk) but I don't know it they televise that american nonsense to the middleast. What is most interesting is that TBN got rid of Hal Lindsay because of his anti-Islamic rhethoric as they were going to plant some new stations in the middle east and were going for a softer touch in eschatology and the condemnation of all things middle eastern. It appears to have worked. To bad EWTN or another catholic presence is not in boradcasting to places like Iran I am sure the fullness of the faith would be intriguing for spiritual searchers. Oh well I would rather have a Muslim convert to evangelical Christianity than remain a Muslim anyday.

Much as it does not sit well with me, this is my attitude too.

Do you find this a true conversion?

Leaving Islam to join an heretical "Christian" sect is almost nothing. To be a true Christian is to be a member of the Church, to receive a TRUE baptism and practice the orthodox faith.

Of course it is a true conversion. Even those who practice the True Faith can have conversion experiences. A conversion is a turning, hopefully in the direction of God. We all must be converted every day if we are to grow in our faith.

This Imam has made a great conversion in his heart and in his practice. He has converted to the Gospel and to Christ. To do so, he has risked his safety and his security and even had to flee from his home. That is the action of a truly converted man.

I pray that he continue to draw closer to God and that he remain open to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, that his guardian angel guard and guide him, and that the Lord enlighten him and bring him to the fullness of faith.

Well I can't speak for the Orthodox As Mexican seems to deny any baptism but Orthodoxy is valid. But as Catholics we do beleive all trinitarian baptism is the True Baptism and joins them to the church in an imperfect way, they now have the most important sacrament of baptism and maybe the springborad to look into the deeper roots of the faith, as we know some converts converts to evangelical christiantiy then later convert Orthodoxy or Catholcism once they study a bit deeper.

As the good book says the Holy spirit goes wherever it wants to and Jesus did not stop those who preached in his name whom he did not send, In the case where Muslims don't know the Trinitarian God they are far better off having the sacrament of baptism and trinitarian idelaogy and the Holy Bible than Having Allah, no sacraments and the Quran if you can't see that and still see have Orthodoxy or the highway mentality your fundamentalsim has blinded all proper reason.

Mexican, forgive me, but I do not remember to which church you belong. If you are Catholic then your opinion is out of line with the teaching of the catechism. Protestant baptism is considered valid by the Roman Catholic Church and Protestants (especially those of the evangelical stripe) are considered to be estranged brethren, yet brethren nontheless.

If you are Orthodox, then please do not make statements that are offensive to the faith of Catholics.

Jason

guess it gives us something more to gloat over

Roman,

No it isn't. What the Church teaches is IF "through no fault of there own" they don't know the Catholic Church is the true faith and IF they use the proper formula then there Baptism is valid.

Both statements must be correct in order for the Baptism to be valid. In modern Protestism it is very difficult to ensure both of these things are correct.

For example, there are some Anglican Churches which use the formula, "I baptize you in the name of the Mother God". The Church in question is run by TBN which is Pentecostal. Depending on the version of Pentecostals some don't believe in water Baptism. Some don't believe in the trinity. Some believe in I don't know what...

Another example, in some Baptist Churches they don't believe in water Baptism. Unfortunately, a lot Catholic priest don't baptize with a conditional Baptism which is what they should be doing. It is very difficult today to know what the other Churches are teaching.

FYI, my wife was a Baptist who converted (before we got married) to the BCC. She was baptized in an independent fundamental Southern Baptist Church. Our priest not knowing what really happened during that event decided (wisely) to baptize my wife conditionally. I think this should ALWAYS be done today.

I attended the Greek Orthodox Church, I am not attending any church in this moment. I don't see myself as an Old Calendarist or anything like this, talking about my own personal opinion it's my understanding that the Catholic Baptism as well as the Orthodox one is always valid. I strongly believe in the truths shared by both Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

I must add that it is not true that the Catholic Church recognizes the validity of the Evangelical Baptism, at least in Mexico. They recognize the Baptisms of the original sects (Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, etc) but the Baptism of the so-called "Christians" (which is the name that the Evangelicals take in Mexico) is treated as invalid along with that of the Witnesses, the Mormons and the Pentecostals.

I myself witnessed at least 3 cases of mixed couples (one of them Mexican and the other one American) when the American part converted to Cathlicism. In the three situations I remember (two men and one girl) they had to receive Baptism-Chrismation-Communion.

I'm sorry if any of my comment soffended Catholics and Orthodox, It was truly not my intention.

Call it the skeptic in me, but that article didn't mention any names, places, ethnicity, or sect - it's mainly about emotionalism; convincing enough for Christian to be appealing, but vague enough to not be contradicted; and it will raise a lot of funds for the organization involved.

If there really was a conversion, thank God, but the article seems to be a fund-raising/marketing effort for the network (which is new and seeking financial support).

Ray,

I am quite aware of the subtlties of the Catholic position. However, in point of fact there simply is no such thing as an unbaptized person who KNOWS the Catholic Church is the "real" Church and yet decides to be baptised as a protestant. Moreove, I would seriously take issue with your assumption that non trinitarian pentecostals are "protestants" in the first place. I was, like your wife, born into a fundamentalist, independant Baptist Church. I don't have a clue what you are referring to as Baptist churches that dont baptise with water unless you are referring to the fire baptized pentecostals. Nor have I ever witnessed a non trinitarian Baptist baptism. IF such things actually exist they are beyond my experience, which I can assure you is quite broad.

Some people think it proper to lump all so called "christian" sects under the protestant umbrella. I think this is both bizzar and unhistorical. Protestants themselves do not recognize the non trinitarian groups. Some even go so far as to call Mormons and Jehovah's wittnesses Protestants. How folks come up with this stuff I have no idea. I suppose even the ancient heresies could be lumped under the protestant umbrella using this kind of logic.

Now I do agree with you about the Anglican (episcopal), Methodists and PResbyterians who use something other than the traditional trinitarian formula. It's becoming faddish to baptize in the name of the Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier. Such baptisms are invalid from the get go. Never heard of baptisms in the name of the Mother of God, though it doesnt surprise me. But then again, some South American Catholics venerate Mary Crucified on the Cross. Such excesses are common across the board and not evidence of "protestantism".

Jason

Mexican,

Your distinction between the original "sects" of Protestantism and the non traditional ones is what I was getting at. I personally believe that these non traditional sects are not properly "Protestant" at all and fall in a different genre. So I guess we are actually in agreement.

Thanks for making your point clear.

Jason

I think you're correct Zenovia. I have long maintained that historic Protestantism, which was orthodox in most of what it held to be true, really is no longer amongst us. What is left is a shell in which some true believers may be found. I think Protestantism as a distinct entity, if you will, is dead. What we have now are those who are either apostate (or at least on the short route to it) and a new thing called Evangelicalism, the child of Protestantism yes, but not Protestantism proper. I am not prepared to defend this hypothesis on this board so I only present it as my opinion. Yet, I have been involved in several of the 'traditional' Protestant groups and have found them to be typically close minded and narrow; not posessing the vibrancy or spirituality their forebears had.

Ray:

On thinking about your post further, I really dont think we are that far apart. My feelings on the matter are such that I prefer to include as many as possible under the pale of Christian. Obvious digressions and departures from the Faith should be seen as such, nevertheless, charity should rule the day. I realize this may conflict with traditional attitudes toward non Catholics but the times they are a changin'. Truth itself cannot change but our attitudes must. The Church is in a precarious position, the Messianic Promise of Indefectibility notwithstanding. I just dont see how we can intend to survive as a Faith and Religion if we take the narrow positions our fathers took. Now is a time of reconciliation. And this reconciliation is necessary to our very survival. Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants alike can give lucid, historically and theologically based reasons for their positions but all these things matter not a whit if we refuse to acknowledge our brother. Jesus saved his harshest words for the pharisees who refused to acknowledge others as their spiritual kinsmen. I think this is a lesson for us today. We are falling apart at the seams by heresy, immorality, schism, dissention and a host of other ills. Rather than spreading on the balm of Giliad we are picking at the scabs. Rather than binding up wounds we are shooting our fallen. Jesus said "anyone who says to his *brother* raca, is answerable to the sanhedrin, but anyone who says "You FOOL!" is in danger of hellfire." Let us be very cautious about what we say concerning the spiritual condition of others. We will be judged based on our words.

Jason

Zenovia,

I have been told that when Moslems convert they begin to notice things like flowers and other things of natural beauty for the first time. Interesting.

Jason

The usage of Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier is used to be politically correct by devoiding the traditional formula of masculine names. If a priest or pastor allows PC to influence his theology I can't see that his intentions are acceptable.

Jason

Another problem with the "Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier" formula is that it can tend towards the heresy of modalism, which basically denies the doctrine of the Trinity. Also, while we may identify the Father with creation, the Son and the Holy Spirit participate in the work of creation, just as both the Father and the Holy Spirit participate with the Son in the work of redemption, and both the Father and the Son participate with the Holy Spirit in the work of sanctification. Finally, we use "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" as the Trinitarian formula because it is the name given to us in Holy Scripture by Jesus himself.

Ryan

I never said anything condemning about Pat Robertson I actually complimented him and yeah I do put him on a lesser level than Catholcism which is my faith, protestantism has its merits which I pointede out to Mexican among them the sacrament of baptism if done correctly and the beleif in the holy scrptures and the triune God, like I said one is better off being Evangelical than Muslim, I did rightly object to the form of pentacostalism tha focuses on the name it claim it materialism but did not put Robertson in that grouping.
And yes Evangelicals posesss much fruiful gifts but I feel they are more fully expressed once converted to the apostolic faith, as even you would admit the evangelical who converts to Orthodoxy or Catholcism brings a lot to those rich traditions but I feel they are not reaching thier spiritual potential till particiapting in the full number of sacraments.

My opinion - one less Muslim to deal with one way or the other!

Evangelicals who convert to Orthodoxy or Eastern Catholicism are a resource just waiting in the wings to be used to revitalize the Eastern tradition.Bradley Nassif hinted as much in his article in the December 2006 issue of Christianity Today look at east and West for my synopsis in this timely article). they have the true evangelical fervor of not only being converts, but they have the deeply instilled missionary spirit that not only can bring more converts our way, but get those long timers and cradles out of their doldrums. with the increasing interest in Patristics and liturgy amongst Evangelicals, watch for more converts. most of these folks know their Bible well, most can fit into doing Apologetics if they are appreciated and sent in the right direction. as far as Muslims coming to Christ, true, one less Muslim to deal with, but methinks the angels in heaven are rejoicing over this former Imam.
Much Love,
Jonn

there is a wideness in God's mercy. the fact that he turned to Jesus Christ for salvation is a good enough start for me, as if I had anything to say about it.do you really think it makes any difference to the Muslims as whether this man is now Protestant, Orthodox, Oriental, Catholic, or Anglican? all they know is that he is an "apostate", and he is "worthy" of death. if this new brother in Christ is willing to not only live for, but die for Christ, then that's all that is important, that's all Jesus cares about. if he can receive the material assistance he now needs, and it comes from Orthodox, or Eastern Catholic,and it leads to Baptism,then all the better. the fact that he is now a believeris what really counts.remember the thief on the cross when he confessed his faith in Jesus Christ, our Lord accepted him.
Much Love,
Jonn