Lists of Apostate Preachers
- Thread starter AKJVReader
- Start date
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
what do you do to relax? any hobbies? its the world, no one is going to be totally perfect. sometimes you cant be that legalistic. man this is coming from a guy who doesnt listen to secular music nor watch tv and movies. i thought i was bad, but sheesh.
Ah, it appears the problem with Tolkein (and Lewis, by association and agreement in several beliefs) is that he was a Cath-o-lick... And a devout one, too.
2
It always takes much more work to expose such libel. Unfortunately, some people are so gullible and will believe anything, so we applaud you for your effort.
Regards
AKJVReader, you really need to read Mere Christianity itself. When I read quotes like the one above, I know right away I'm dealing with someone who either has never read what Lewis actually wrote for himself, or is "picking and choosing" Lewis' words, much in the same way he is accusing of Lewis doing so with the Bible.
Here is what Lewis actually says about the substitutionary blood atonement of Christ (emphasis mine):
We are in the same boat here. We believe that the death of Christ is just that point in history at which something absolutely unimaginable from outside shows through into our own world. And if we cannot picture even the atoms of which our own world is built, of course we are not going to be able to picture this. Indeed, if we found that we could fully understand it, that very fact would show it was not what it professes to be—the inconceivable, the uncreated, the thing from beyond nature, striking down into nature like lightning. You may ask what good will it be to us if we do not understand it. But that is easily answered. A man can eat his dinner without understanding exactly how food nourishes him.
A man can accept what Christ has done without knowing how it works: indeed, he certainly would not know how it works until he has accepted it.
We are told that Christ was killed for us, that His death has washed out our sins, and that by dying He disabled death itself. That is the formula. That is Christianity. That is what has to be believed. Any theories we build up as to how Christ's death did all this are, in my view, quite secondary: mere plans or diagrams to be left alone if they do not help us, and, even if they do help us, not to be confused with the thing itself. All the same, some of these theories are worth looking at. (From Mere Christianity)
Ah, it appears the problem with Tolkein (and Lewis, by association and agreement in several beliefs) is that he was a Cath-o-lick... And a devout one, too.
Yep, I think that's it in a nutshell, Joe.
Whenever I see threads of this nature, I can't help but notice three things:
1. That there is always some agenda (apart from God's agenda)
2. A preacher is "apostate" or a bible is "corrupt" because he/they don't fit someone's individual idea or interpretation.
3. Quotes and texts are almost without fail taken out of context and/or skewed.
Are there apostate preachers? You bet there are....but apostate means they've left Christian orthodoxy...not that one likes the NIV and the other the NASB, or what have you.
Maybe more attention ought to be paid to the words of our Lord:
And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
If we're gonna pass judgment, it had better be a righteous judgment...and not just an "I don't like this guy" judgment.
1. That there is always some agenda (apart from God's agenda)
2. A preacher is "apostate" or a bible is "corrupt" because he/they don't fit someone's individual idea or interpretation.
3. Quotes and texts are almost without fail taken out of context and/or skewed.
Are there apostate preachers? You bet there are....but apostate means they've left Christian orthodoxy...not that one likes the NIV and the other the NASB, or what have you.
Maybe more attention ought to be paid to the words of our Lord:
And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
If we're gonna pass judgment, it had better be a righteous judgment...and not just an "I don't like this guy" judgment.
[FONT=arial,helvatica]
John 7:
24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. [/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvatica]
Romans 16:
17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Philippians 1:
[/FONT][FONT=arial,helvatica]9 And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment;
10 That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ.
11 Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God.
[/FONT][FONT=arial,helvatica]2 Timothy 4:
10 For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvatica]
[/FONT][FONT=arial,helvatica]Ephesians 5:
11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
2 Timothy 4:
2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. [/FONT]
AKJV, your judgments do not adhere to or uphold this Scriptural criteria. You have NEVER read any work from C.S. Lewis. What would you say to an atheist who demonizes the Bible, even though he's never read it? Would you take him seriously? You two are in the same boat, my dear.
With all the creepy preachers out there why would any one pick on C S Lewis. I have not read his books they are just not my kind of reading. But i have heard plenty of liars, much deceit, from the pulpit.
I have to stand in agreement with the Lords here AKJV...do you not see that you, yourself are violating these principles by not only passing judgments on one whose work you freely admit that you have never read, but also failing to uphold Romans 16:17 for yourself as you relentlessly copy/paste and link to those who are causing divisions and commit offenses contrary to good doctrine, namely the doctrine of not bearing false witness, which I've already shown that these writers are doing with the works of Lewis.
This is one of the times when I truly wish we were speaking face-to-face rather than posting, because this may very well be sounding like a personal attack...and it's not, believe me it's not. I've read enough of your posts around AKJV to be convinced of your dedication to God and His Word. But, I guess I'm trying to fulfill what 2 Timothy 4:2 says to do and am rebuking you on this particular issue and exhorting you to actually see for yourself what Lewis has said.
So far in this thread, Lewis has been accurately quoted stating, in what are truly his own words that:
"I believe that Jesus was (and is) God."
"I believe it on His authority."
That when Jesus forgave people of their sins..."He unhesitatingly behaved as if He was the party chiefly concerned, the person chiefly offended in all offenses. This makes sense only if He really was the God whose laws are broken and whose love is wounded in every sin."
About Jesus, "Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God.
But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
and Lewis concluded with:
"Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God."
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."
"The Christian does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us."
"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word 'darkness' on the walls of his cell."
"I pray because I can't help myself. I pray because I'm helpless. I pray because the need flows out of me all the time- waking and sleeping. It doesn't change God- it changes me."
"I didn’t go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of Port would do that. If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don’t recommend Christianity."
"[To have Faith in Christ] means, of course, trying to do all that He says. There would be no sense in saying you trusted a person if you would not take his advice. Thus if you have really handed yourself over to Him, it must follow that you are trying to obey Him. But trying in a new way, a less worried way. Not doing these things in order to be saved, but because He has begun to save you already. Not hoping to get to Heaven as a reward for your actions, but inevitably wanting to act in a certain way because a first faint gleam of Heaven is already inside you."
"We are told that Christ was killed for us, that His death has washed out our sins, and that by dying He disabled death itself. That is the formula. That is Christianity. That is what has to be believed."
So, by his own words, Lewis has confessed that Christ is God, confessed that Christ is the chief sufferer of sins, that God doesn't love us because we are good, but makes us good because He loves us, confessed his own helplessness and dependence upon prayer, confessed that Christ died for us, confessed that His death has washed our sins, that His death disabled death itself...
Have you read any of this? And does any of it give you a moments pause to think that perhaps what you've been told about Lewis, (since you won't read his works for yourself) is wrong, and that the man was indeed as much a Christian as you are?
Even the greatest preachers can err. Spurgeon was a gapper. “We have the story of the fitting up of the world, during the seven days, for the habitation of man; but we have not the history of the creation of the earth before that time. To prepare for the seven days’ rapid furnishing of the earth for man, millions of years may have elapsed.”
Answers in Genesis (AiG) says about this: “Spurgeon was a “child of his time,” and he failed to see that Genesis 1–11, especially its teaching on the age of the earth, is foundational to the gospel. But such men as Spurgeon had Bibles and could have stood on Scripture’s authority regarding this point (just as did the “scriptural geologists” of the early 1800s). Instead, most of these late nineteenth-century preachers skimmed over key details of Genesis 1–11—just as most scholars do today.”
“We can learn many things from Spurgeon, but he made a serious mistake in this area, Christians need to realize that well-respected, sincerely intentioned, godly leaders can make gospel-subverting mistakes. It happened to Peter (Matthew 16:23 and Galatians 2:11–14), and neither Jesus nor Paul hesitated to confront his error.”
Spurgeon, just like the rest of us, was a fallible and sinful human in need of salvation.
Many today hold this same view. For example, John Ankerberg. He is a great teacher, orthodox to the max, except on Genesis 1. Whenever I see Hugh Ross on his show, I pull my hair out, not only because of what Ross says, but when Ankerberg marvels and agrees with him. Even the great theologian Millard Erickson errs on Genesis 1, claiming that, even though it is clear that the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day, he claims they were actually created on the second and God just hid them. From who, he doesn’t say since all there was at the time were plants. Why would plants need to be deceived? I have no idea!
At least Spurgeon fought evolution of humans, that we were created by God in His image. Unfortunately, there are so many pastors and preachers out there that reject anything and everything in not only Genesis 1, but Genesis 1-11! What is sad is that taking any or all of what is written in those 11 chapters out, the rest of the Bible falls apart because they have destroyed the foundation. There is no longer any Biblical authority if these chapters are nothing but fairy tales. Yet, these people preach on evolution and their congregations accept it because after all, pastor knows best.
Spurgeon said it best: “Everywhere there is apathy. Nobody cares whether that which is preached is true or false. A sermon is a sermon whatever the subject.” That is true, not only on the evolution vs creation issue, but on so many non-biblical worldviews creeping into the church today and being accepted by preachers (Warren, Osteen, Hinn, Duplantis, Bentley, Bell, McLearn etc etc etc). This is the war we are in spiritually. And as we approach the end times, it’s only going to get worse. Wake up people!
This is why Paul gave us the warning:
"[FONT=arial, helvatica]Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." [/FONT](Col 2:8)
Yes, this very likely had to do with a specific issue at the time, but in the thousands of years since Paul wrote this, it has been shown over and over again that man made philosophy has no place in Christianity.
We must use discernment at all times. No matter what is said or who says it, we must test the spirit. To not do so places all of us in peril.
Answers in Genesis (AiG) says about this: “Spurgeon was a “child of his time,” and he failed to see that Genesis 1–11, especially its teaching on the age of the earth, is foundational to the gospel. But such men as Spurgeon had Bibles and could have stood on Scripture’s authority regarding this point (just as did the “scriptural geologists” of the early 1800s). Instead, most of these late nineteenth-century preachers skimmed over key details of Genesis 1–11—just as most scholars do today.”
“We can learn many things from Spurgeon, but he made a serious mistake in this area, Christians need to realize that well-respected, sincerely intentioned, godly leaders can make gospel-subverting mistakes. It happened to Peter (Matthew 16:23 and Galatians 2:11–14), and neither Jesus nor Paul hesitated to confront his error.”
Spurgeon, just like the rest of us, was a fallible and sinful human in need of salvation.
Many today hold this same view. For example, John Ankerberg. He is a great teacher, orthodox to the max, except on Genesis 1. Whenever I see Hugh Ross on his show, I pull my hair out, not only because of what Ross says, but when Ankerberg marvels and agrees with him. Even the great theologian Millard Erickson errs on Genesis 1, claiming that, even though it is clear that the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day, he claims they were actually created on the second and God just hid them. From who, he doesn’t say since all there was at the time were plants. Why would plants need to be deceived? I have no idea!
At least Spurgeon fought evolution of humans, that we were created by God in His image. Unfortunately, there are so many pastors and preachers out there that reject anything and everything in not only Genesis 1, but Genesis 1-11! What is sad is that taking any or all of what is written in those 11 chapters out, the rest of the Bible falls apart because they have destroyed the foundation. There is no longer any Biblical authority if these chapters are nothing but fairy tales. Yet, these people preach on evolution and their congregations accept it because after all, pastor knows best.
Spurgeon said it best: “Everywhere there is apathy. Nobody cares whether that which is preached is true or false. A sermon is a sermon whatever the subject.” That is true, not only on the evolution vs creation issue, but on so many non-biblical worldviews creeping into the church today and being accepted by preachers (Warren, Osteen, Hinn, Duplantis, Bentley, Bell, McLearn etc etc etc). This is the war we are in spiritually. And as we approach the end times, it’s only going to get worse. Wake up people!
This is why Paul gave us the warning:
"[FONT=arial, helvatica]Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." [/FONT](Col 2:8)
Yes, this very likely had to do with a specific issue at the time, but in the thousands of years since Paul wrote this, it has been shown over and over again that man made philosophy has no place in Christianity.
We must use discernment at all times. No matter what is said or who says it, we must test the spirit. To not do so places all of us in peril.
And how can you do that when you have not even read any of Lewis' works? You are relying on others.
Yes, what is "testing the spirit" exactly...and how do we do it?
Is it just by listening to others whom we think are godly and never checking out things for ourselves?
If this is "testing the spirit" I would say that the church would have be vanquished before it ever got out of Jerusalem....the "godly" religious leaders of that city had much to say about Jesus and the apostles, none of it true.
Would you have listened to those who said that Jesus spread blasphemes...that He did His miracles via the power of Satan...that the Apostles were drunk on Pentecost...
How about today...how many people, even those who call themselves Christian reject the works of Paul because they say his hates women and gays....
AKJV...I read your post regarding Spurgeon with interest and I'm left wondering just what your point was in sharing it...it was quite good, and I agree with the overall point of it...but to what purpose did you share it...
Was this to tell us that even good preachers such as Stewart can make mistakes and perhaps you are realizing that he's made a mistake about C.S. Lewis and maybe some of the others on his "list"?
If so...good, I'm glad that you are realizing that.
The truth of the matter is there is not one, no not one preacher, evangelist, nor even Apostle of the first church that gets it 100% right, 100% of the time. I don't agree with everything Spurgeon said, nor Lewis, nor my own Pastor Reeder, nor even Peter, yes that Peter...I think Peter was wrong for his hypocrisy about the gentiles with the Jews and Paul was right for rebuking him on it.
But, it would be wrong to start calling Spurgeon, Lewis, et. al. heretics because of differences of opinions in doctrines that have been tough issues for the Church since it's inception...
Frankly, it's not "heretical" to say " “We have the story of the fitting up of the world, during the seven days, for the habitation of man; but we have not the history of the creation of the earth before that time. To prepare for the seven days’ rapid furnishing of the earth for man, millions of years may have elapsed.â€
Simply put, the earth was sitting there covered with water prior to God saying "Let there be light"...was it sitting there for 12 hours or 12 million years? The Bible doesn't say...so everyone draws a conclusion...some conclude that, given the context of the rest of Genesis 1, it was 12 hours...others, millions if not billions of years. As long as we leave it at that...there is no heresy...just differing exegesis of Scriptures regarding Genesis 1:1 & 2.
Many of the doctrines that Stewart condemns Lewis of being a "heretic" over, are much the same thing...differing exegesis of Scripture. Lewis believed that salvation is worked out within us via our belief, baptism and communion...millions of Christians, including me, believe the same. Others are just as firm that only belief is necessary (I guess the demons are saved then) but again, this isn't the same as heresy...just differing opinion between sincere and intelligent believers.
Accusing someone as a heretic and an occultist is a very serious charge and one that shouldn't be made unless one has carefully examined the person in full, made sure that the accused is being accurately quoted and their true views are being presented.
This is Stewart's failure regarding Lewis...he obviously has not examined Lewis, is not accurately quoting him, and is not presenting his true views. His "spirit" is tested, and found wanting.
Is it just by listening to others whom we think are godly and never checking out things for ourselves?
If this is "testing the spirit" I would say that the church would have be vanquished before it ever got out of Jerusalem....the "godly" religious leaders of that city had much to say about Jesus and the apostles, none of it true.
Would you have listened to those who said that Jesus spread blasphemes...that He did His miracles via the power of Satan...that the Apostles were drunk on Pentecost...
How about today...how many people, even those who call themselves Christian reject the works of Paul because they say his hates women and gays....
AKJV...I read your post regarding Spurgeon with interest and I'm left wondering just what your point was in sharing it...it was quite good, and I agree with the overall point of it...but to what purpose did you share it...
Was this to tell us that even good preachers such as Stewart can make mistakes and perhaps you are realizing that he's made a mistake about C.S. Lewis and maybe some of the others on his "list"?
If so...good, I'm glad that you are realizing that.
The truth of the matter is there is not one, no not one preacher, evangelist, nor even Apostle of the first church that gets it 100% right, 100% of the time. I don't agree with everything Spurgeon said, nor Lewis, nor my own Pastor Reeder, nor even Peter, yes that Peter...I think Peter was wrong for his hypocrisy about the gentiles with the Jews and Paul was right for rebuking him on it.
But, it would be wrong to start calling Spurgeon, Lewis, et. al. heretics because of differences of opinions in doctrines that have been tough issues for the Church since it's inception...
Frankly, it's not "heretical" to say " “We have the story of the fitting up of the world, during the seven days, for the habitation of man; but we have not the history of the creation of the earth before that time. To prepare for the seven days’ rapid furnishing of the earth for man, millions of years may have elapsed.â€
Simply put, the earth was sitting there covered with water prior to God saying "Let there be light"...was it sitting there for 12 hours or 12 million years? The Bible doesn't say...so everyone draws a conclusion...some conclude that, given the context of the rest of Genesis 1, it was 12 hours...others, millions if not billions of years. As long as we leave it at that...there is no heresy...just differing exegesis of Scriptures regarding Genesis 1:1 & 2.
Many of the doctrines that Stewart condemns Lewis of being a "heretic" over, are much the same thing...differing exegesis of Scripture. Lewis believed that salvation is worked out within us via our belief, baptism and communion...millions of Christians, including me, believe the same. Others are just as firm that only belief is necessary (I guess the demons are saved then) but again, this isn't the same as heresy...just differing opinion between sincere and intelligent believers.
Accusing someone as a heretic and an occultist is a very serious charge and one that shouldn't be made unless one has carefully examined the person in full, made sure that the accused is being accurately quoted and their true views are being presented.
This is Stewart's failure regarding Lewis...he obviously has not examined Lewis, is not accurately quoting him, and is not presenting his true views. His "spirit" is tested, and found wanting.
It's not just Stewart who has exposed CS Lewis, Dr Scott Johnson of http://www.contendingfortruth.com has exposed him too. And there are other sites too that say the same things about CS Lewis. To me i have never been interested in CS Lewis for some reason and i have no desire to read his works, i have heard enough about him already. I'm pretty selective as to who i listen to. I will let God judge CS Lewis as He would know secrets that we dont know yet. I can only post this thread as a kind of gentle warning, you may disagree with me.
Gentle warning my perfectly smooth and peachy behind! This thread is an out-and-out attack on a man used by God because he differs in his theology from the US evangelical wing of the Church. You should be ashamed of yourself and so should David Stewart et al.
Also a selection of topics from the "Contending for truth website"
Can you say " Loony?" Of course you can!
From the same site re C.S. Lewis
"
Source
Note, no references to WHO it is asserting that Tolkien and Lewis were members of the Golden Dawn, this is simply character assassination at it's most mucky!
Also a selection of topics from the "Contending for truth website"
Can you say " Loony?" Of course you can!
From the same site re C.S. Lewis
"
Source
Note, no references to WHO it is asserting that Tolkien and Lewis were members of the Golden Dawn, this is simply character assassination at it's most mucky!
Last edited by a moderator:
Some people are quite happy to revel in their own "blissful ignorance." I've never met anyone happy to revel in someone else's.
I found this in a booklet today, it is about Apostate Preachers:
Over one hundred years ago, JC Ryle, the first Bishop of Liverpool, raised a warning voice against the apostasy of his day. His words are never more urgently needed than today:
"Many things combine to make the present inroad of false doctrine peculiarly dangerous. There is an undeniable zeal in some of the teachers of error: their "earnestness" makes many think they must be right. There is a great appearance of learning and theological knowledge: many fancy that such clever and intellectual men must surely be safe guides.
"There is a quantity of half-truth taught by the modern false teachers: they are incessantly using Scriptural terms and phrases in an unscriptural sense. There is a morbid craving in the public mind for a more sensuous, ceremonial, sensational, showy worship: men are impatient of inward, invisible heart-work. There is a silly readiness in every direction to believe everybody who talks cleverly, lovingly, and earnestly, and a determination to forget that Satan is often "transformed into an angel of light" (2 Cor 11:14).
"The greatest heresies have crept into the Church of Christ by means of ordained men. Neither Episcopal ordination, nor Presbyterian ordination, nor any other ordination, confers any immunity from error and false doctrine.
"He that would be safe must cultivate the spirit of a sentinel at a critical post. He must not mind being laughed at and ridiculed, as one who "has a keen nose for heresy." In days like these he must not be ashamed to suspect danger. And if any one scoffs at him for doing, he may well be content to reply, "The serpent beguiled Eve by his subtilty."
I still haven't got a reply as to why Hollywood loves CS Lewis rather than mocking him for his "Christian" works.
Luke 16:
13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.
15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
Over one hundred years ago, JC Ryle, the first Bishop of Liverpool, raised a warning voice against the apostasy of his day. His words are never more urgently needed than today:
"Many things combine to make the present inroad of false doctrine peculiarly dangerous. There is an undeniable zeal in some of the teachers of error: their "earnestness" makes many think they must be right. There is a great appearance of learning and theological knowledge: many fancy that such clever and intellectual men must surely be safe guides.
"There is a quantity of half-truth taught by the modern false teachers: they are incessantly using Scriptural terms and phrases in an unscriptural sense. There is a morbid craving in the public mind for a more sensuous, ceremonial, sensational, showy worship: men are impatient of inward, invisible heart-work. There is a silly readiness in every direction to believe everybody who talks cleverly, lovingly, and earnestly, and a determination to forget that Satan is often "transformed into an angel of light" (2 Cor 11:14).
"The greatest heresies have crept into the Church of Christ by means of ordained men. Neither Episcopal ordination, nor Presbyterian ordination, nor any other ordination, confers any immunity from error and false doctrine.
"He that would be safe must cultivate the spirit of a sentinel at a critical post. He must not mind being laughed at and ridiculed, as one who "has a keen nose for heresy." In days like these he must not be ashamed to suspect danger. And if any one scoffs at him for doing, he may well be content to reply, "The serpent beguiled Eve by his subtilty."
I still haven't got a reply as to why Hollywood loves CS Lewis rather than mocking him for his "Christian" works.
Luke 16:
13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.
15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
Some people are quite happy to revel in their own "blissful ignorance." I've never met anyone happy to revel in someone else's.
Agreed. I find it astounding even.