Is Following Christ Compatible With Christianity?

[davidk]

A bit of controversy certainly livened things up on this website.

This "controversy" began when, on post #40, a simple question was asked. It was asked again on #'s 42, 44, 56, 60, referenced in 61, and lastly in #70. It has been avoided, denied, and insulted, and one tried to change the question. Those responses were telling.

 

2 John 1:7; "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist."

 

Since:

Liberal/Progressive Theology believes the Bible can be historically false and yet religiously true, jumping from rationality to where two mutually contradictory statements can be true. Where its statements can seem to be profound but are vague. Where it casts off the historicity of Scripture while tying to get the same results that the Bible teaches.

-Liberal/Progressive Theology blurs the line between God the Father and God the Son; blurs the line on the diety of Christ, blurs it between Christ and sinful man, blurs the line between a lost man and a saved man. It is where secular idealism can speak the 'Word of God' better than the Bible. And cannot speak with clarity or true authority because it is completely subjective; where anything can happen.

-Liberal/Progressive Theology looks for that 'experience' and an upper 'conciousness' as evidence, but cannot really understand it or explain it, even to oneself; for it is 'beyond mere language'. This 'upper story' religion has completely seperated the meaning of life from reason, there are no real catagories of truth, right or wrong.

-Liberal/Progressive Theology of Biblical interpretation is to decide what parts of the Bible is the Word of God and what isn't on your own subjective judgement as to what parts showed the spirit of Jesus Christ.

-Liberal/Progressive Theology has no propositional verbalized communication from God to man. It is a theology of 'naturalism'. It is only contentless religious words with an 'upper story' experience, where Jesus and Krishna are interchangeable. Many liberal theologians use the word God to equal no god to provide optimism to their pessimistic predicament ( no certainty), or only using the words as psychological tools to give psychological help or aid sociological manipulation.

-Liberal/progressive theology is one unified universalistic and pantheistic system.

-Liberal/Progressive Theology dwells only in the land of men, the circle of the finite, having no meaning or authority beyond what finite man can give it. So man is on his own with only religious words rather than religious truth.

 

Can: Liberal/Progressive Theology be compatable with following Christ (Christianity)?

 

In other words: Liberal/Progressive Theology and Christianity are two seperate religions with nothing in common except certain terms which they use with totally different meanings.

[mystictrek]

I suppose the simplest question to best define a Christian in Christianity is: Did Christ come as a man (in the flesh)? One's Christianity is determined by one's answer to this question alone. 'Yes' or 'No'. No explanation is needed.

 

+++

 

That's certainly not the question Jesus of Nazareth would say is crucial. It is by our fruits that they will know who we are ... the fruits of love in action.

 

A Christian is one who knows that we are all loved unconditionally and that we are all called to spread this good news inviting people near and far to the feast of abundant life without conditions. It is imperative that every human being is included in the abundance. This requires devotion to the mission of creating and maintaining peace and justice for all.

[fatherman]

+++

 

That's certainly not the question Jesus of Nazareth would say is crucial. It is by our fruits that they will know who we are ... the fruits of love in action.

 

A Christian is one who knows that we are all loved unconditionally and that we are all called to spread this good news inviting people near and far to the feast of abundant life without conditions. It is imperative that every human being is included in the abundance. This requires devotion to the mission of creating and maintaining peace and justice for all.

 

MT,

 

You seem to at least understand what our friend is trolling for, so please explain it to me. What is the significance of the question "Did Christ come as a man (in the flesh)?" Am I missing something significant here? Many men have come in the flesh. In fact, every man that ever walked the earth came as a man (in the flesh). What is he getting at? He won't clarify for me.

 

Christ certainly didn't come as a woman? Is that the question he's concerned about? Or is he asking if Christ came as a ghost?

 

I'm serious here. Clue me in!

 

Or is this one of those questions like, "If a rooster lays an egg on top of a north facing barn, which side will the egg roll?" "Ha ha! roosters don't lay eggs, Dumb@ss!"

[Cynthia]

MT,

 

You seem to at least understand what our friend is trolling for, so please explain it to me. What is the significance of the question "Did Christ come as a man (in the flesh)?" Am I missing something significant here? Many men have come in the flesh. In fact, every man that ever walked the earth came as a man (in the flesh). What is he getting at? He won't clarify for me.

 

Christ certainly didn't come as a woman? Is that the question he's concerned about? Or is he asking if Christ came as a ghost?

 

I'm serious here. Clue me in!

 

Or is this one of those questions like, "If a rooster lays an egg on top of a north facing barn, which side will the egg roll?" "Ha ha! roosters don't lay eggs, Dumb@ss!"

 

 

LOL Fatherman! I think he's trolling ( ) for the minute theological question re: whether Jesus was fully man, fully God, or some mix thereof. I'm not sure why this question would be critical as Godly, devoted, literalistic christians disagree on the answer.

 

I think the idea of myth being more true than factual accounts is lost.

 

It has been fun to see the board moving again!

[McKenna]

A bit of controversy certainly livened things up on this website.

This "controversy" began when, on post #40, a simple question was asked. It was asked again on #'s 42, 44, 56, 60, referenced in 61, and lastly in #70. It has been avoided, denied, and insulted, and one tried to change the question. Those responses were telling.

 

Actually, to be fair, the question was first asked on the "Ecumentalism" thread, post #50, and I gave a response in post #53. Although I probably meant, in my response, something quite different from what you were asking.

 

Can: Liberal/Progressive Theology be compatable with following Christ (Christianity)?

 

In other words: Liberal/Progressive Theology and Christianity are two seperate religions with nothing in common except certain terms which they use with totally different meanings.

 

Guess we'd better change the website name then. How about TCLPTWRCBWTD? "The Center for Liberal/Progressive Theology Which Really isn't Christianity Because We're Totally Delusional." Sort of rolls off the tongue?

 

Sorry for poking fun at you, DavidK, and it's not out of malice, I hope you know. I just think it's amusing how much labels seem to matter to you. I couldn't care less whether you call me a Christian or a "Liberal/Progressive Theologian" or whatever I suppose we are by your definition. No offense.

 

+++

 

That's certainly not the question Jesus of Nazareth would say is crucial. It is by our fruits that they will know who we are ... the fruits of love in action.

 

A Christian is one who knows that we are all loved unconditionally and that we are all called to spread this good news inviting people near and far to the feast of abundant life without conditions. It is imperative that every human being is included in the abundance. This requires devotion to the mission of creating and maintaining peace and justice for all.

 

Well-said, methinks.

 

It has been fun to see the board moving again!

 

Definitely!!

[October's Autumn]

MT,

 

You seem to at least understand what our friend is trolling for, so please explain it to me. What is the significance of the question "Did Christ come as a man (in the flesh)?" Am I missing something significant here? Many men have come in the flesh. In fact, every man that ever walked the earth came as a man (in the flesh). What is he getting at? He won't clarify for me.

 

 

I suspect he is refering to a "heresy" that is born out of the belief that the body is evil and Jesus didn't not come in flesh because a god could/would not do so. This group believes that Jesus only appeared to be flesh but was actually not. I'm not sure why he is so hung up on it. There are plenty of other "heretical" beliefs around here for him to get excited about.

 

It is called Docetism

 

http://home.sprynet.com/~eagreen/docetism.html

 

I only read the beginning so I don't know if the rest is accurate!

[davidk]

Trolling for an answer. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

MT-

That's certainly not the question Jesus of Nazareth would say is crucial. It is by our fruits that they will know who we are ... the fruits of love in action.

I seems you may have said you had some seminary training. Does this sound familiar?

 

John 15:1; "I am the true vine, and the Father is the vine dresser.

John 15:4-10; "Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you, unless you abide in Me. I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me, and I in him, he bears much fruit; for apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch, and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If you abide in Me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it shall be done for you. By this is my Father glorified, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples. Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love."

 

So, what is the question He would ask?

 

fatherman-

I'm serious here. Clue me in!

2 John 1:7; "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist."

Are you asking if I believe that Jesus was a real man? Or are you asking if God became flesh in the form of Jesus?

Yes and Yes. Whatever baggage you think applies for Christ to have become a man. Look up definitions for Christ. Check out prophecy. What presuppositions would be required, and what would the consequences be? Is the Word of God true about Him or not? What did Jesus say about Himself? How does the 2 John scripture reference apply? You don't have to answer in public if you choose not to. It is 'pass' or 'fail'. You can change your answer. You can discuss your answer.

 

McKenna-

Sorry for poking fun at you, DavidK, and it's not out of malice, I hope you know. I just think it's amusing how much labels seem to matter to you. I couldn't care less whether you call me a Christian or a "Liberal/Progressive Theologian" or whatever I suppose we are by your definition. No offense.

It is funny. You're forgiven...again.

I believe I had the labels "arrogant", "fundamentalist", "positivist" aimed at me, while others have labeled themselves either liberal or progressive before I ever picked 'em up. (ie. David & Jen) You could do some 'no offense' comments about them and how they like labels, just to make up.

Guess we'd better change the website name then. How about TCLPTWRCBWTD? "The Center for Liberal/Progressive Theology Which Really isn't Christianity Because We're Totally Delusional." Sort of rolls off the tongue?

Well, if the shoe fits...

 

Cynthia-

...Godly, devoted, literalistic christians disagree on the answer.

Really. Who?

Are you trying to say the Bible is historically false but spiritually true?

 

October's Autumn:

It is called Docetism

Sorry, that isn't close.

[TheGreatWhiteBuffalo]

Hi Everyone,

 

This and other similar topics are being discussed in several areas on the net, I've added a question in another part of the TCPC forum about What would you give for world peace?

 

I also would like to know of your thoughts on the actions of Jesus at the Temple throwing over the tables of the money changers?

 

Point and Counter-point... First who were the money changers working for? In one of my favorite songs "Put your hand in the hand" there is a line that the buyers and the sellers are no different fellers than I proffess to be...

 

A common flaw in religious teachings is that we are all sinners, I agree that we are all not perfect, but we are perfectly created by our creator are we not?

 

I have many things for us to discuss, one unraveling in the Forum called Communati are posts by Steven Clark Bradley, I've started to discuss some of his writings and in part three of his series we are right at the beginning of the book, he uses the Bible to write out a very interesting midrash. For people that believe the Bible to be the innerrant word of God the story would be new while incorporating the Biblical stories in a new way.

 

What I have to say questions the very foundation and exposes the flaws that I believe exist in the text where I can read the movement of imposed manipulation by the hands of the scribes and their leaders.

 

The message of the Bible should be LOVE, the face of GOD is LOVE in ALL things. ALL living things are created and the message is pro-creation. Pure and Holy LOVE. When you see the face of LOVE you see the face of GOD.

 

So would GOD also be evil?

 

What is an evil act?

 

I would like to also add that if I don't want a child to get into the cookie jar, I shouldn't put the cookie jar where the child can get into it. If the child really would like a cookie the child will learn to ask.

[McKenna]

It is funny. You're forgiven...again.

 

Again? Okay...

 

I believe I had the labels "arrogant", "fundamentalist", "positivist" aimed at me, while others have labeled themselves either liberal or progressive before I ever picked 'em up. (ie. David & Jen) You could do some 'no offense' comments about them and how they like labels, just to make up.

 

Well, my point was specifically about the label of "Christian," because you keep asking a question to try to define if we're "Christians" or not, and you specifically said that we weren't Christians (if we agree with the points on your list of what Liberals/Progressives believe) because "Liberal Progressivism" is different from Christianity in your book. I got the feeling from your posts that you were trying to define what a Christian was and were telling us that at least most of us aren't actually Christians. (Please correct me if I misunderstood/am misrepresenting your posts.) I was responding to that by saying that, no offense to you, but whether or not you think I am a Christian really has very little impact on my life, beliefs, or relationship to God.

 

Therefore, my point was less about labels in general than it was about a specific label, that of "Christian." I probably could have worded it better, as looking at my post again perhaps my point was a bit vague.

 

I don't necessarily have a problem with labels generally, because they can be helpful and tend to be necessary to distinguish one person from another. (I'm female. That's a label. Big deal? I'm also American. Another label. Woopee. ) I would call myself a progressive and don't object to you calling me one. I believe you're labeled a fundamentalist because you express quite conservative viewpoints and, if I'm not mistaken, you may have called yourself a fundamentalist at some point as well, although I can't remember the specifics so maybe I'm just making that up.

 

Anyway, my point wasn't about labels in general, but I don't think they're evil, although I agree with you that perhaps they have been thrown around too freely in this and other threads. Please let us know if you object to the label of "fundamentalist"!

 

Well, if the shoe fits...

 

[October's Autumn]

October's Autumn:

Sorry, that isn't close.

 

Actually, that is exactly what docetism is. I looked it up.

[TheGreatWhiteBuffalo]

I jumped in on this thread looking to start a discussion with people who think they know what Christianity is all about, particularily on this thread the subject of Tough Love came up, I'd like to address the issue of Love and what is Love and what is GOD's Love and is Tough Love anywhere close to the Love of GOD?

 

I feel that Tough Love is a form of hatred that causes people to harm others or themselves and this is a causal condition that could be avoided.

 

This is a good thread to also ask the question of, "So You think you are a Christian?" followed by the statement that, "You are a Liar!" The point here becomes internal as well as external and my experience with these words were a complete violation to the court of law, this question and statement came to me from a County Court Judge that was and is clearly out of his mind.

 

What happens next is to ask the real question... Would you know Jesus if Jesus appeared in the flesh before you or if Jesus was writing to you? What I'm getting at is very important, if you can't see Jesus and the works and words of Jesus in others then how is it that you can call yourself a Christian?

 

The work and words of Jesus are always true, and if Jesus was to speak to you would you hear, see and speak to know the individual better? Or would you cast out the one that comes to you with the message of truth?

 

It would not be the first time that Jesus was cast out of a community, in fact I believe that two communities worked together to try to extinguish all evidence that Jesus ever existed. Would you try to hide your Jesus from the rest of humanity?

 

Who has treated one like Jesus with such offense?

Who has treated the innocent with such an offense?

Who would push the victim of a crime into a ditch?

 

Convictions of a hardened heart, must be softened before Love can be found and known, most importantly that Love will be inbetween Liberal and Conservative, that Love will be True and Open once the heart is ready to recieve and give to the one that helps people to hear, see and speak.

 

Would you hurt a person with the spirit of Jesus in them?

 

Being purified in Spirit, a human will always be human but they can be perfectly created for the purpose of the work for and of GOD.

 

Would a creator promote pro-creation?

 

What do you think GOD would say to you?

[McKenna]

I jumped in on this thread looking to start a discussion with people who think they know what Christianity is all about, particularily on this thread the subject of Tough Love came up, I'd like to address the issue of Love and what is Love and what is GOD's Love and is Tough Love anywhere close to the Love of GOD?

 

I feel that Tough Love is a form of hatred that causes people to harm others or themselves and this is a causal condition that could be avoided.

 

Can you define what you mean when you say tough love, and explain why you think it's so bad? I just want to know what exactly you're arguing against.

 

I believe the idea of tough love was brought up in the context of Jesus calling people out for being hypocrites - that kind of "tough love." Is that what you're objecting to?

[davidk]

"Actually, that is exactly what docetism is. I looked it up." -October's Autumn-

The definition is good. Your saying I was refering to that particular heresy, was incorrect.

-------------------------------

"Please let us know if you object to the label of 'fundamentalist'!" -McKenna-

As a matter of fact, I do object. If you need to put a prefix on an otherwise good description, I would say, 'Historic' Christian, 'fundamental' Christian ( not the -ist; 'fundamental' has also been used to denegrate rather than be accurate), or 'Orthodox' Christian, or even 'Traditional' Christian would be much more appropos.

 

Articles and posts of Liberal/Progressive positions criticize the Historic Christian faith and unashamedly claim to better know what Christians and faith SHOULD be.

I presented what the Progressive doctrine has exposed itself to mean by way of what it says and confesses to believe and simply reported it to you. Each one of us has to ask if that is what "I" believe or not.

--------------------------------

 

-From: TheGreatWhiteBuffalo-

Q:

1-"A common flaw in religious teachings is that we are all sinners, I agree that we are all not perfect, but we are perfectly created by our creator are we not?

2-So would GOD also be evil?

3- The message of the Bible should be LOVE,..."

 

A:

1-God's teaching is not flawed, we are! (1 John 1:8) Agreed, we are not perfect (AKA: sinners). We are not perfect because we rebel against God and His Law, and we just can't seem to help ourselves! We want to be perfect, but we like to sin!

We are not perfectly created. Didn't we just agree we're not perfect. Com' on!

2-No

3-If the message of the Bible should be love, what is it?

 

If you can't see Jesus and the works and words of Jesus written in the Bible then how is it that you can call yourself a Christian? Without God communicating (this Bible, this Word of God) His truth to us, how could we know?

 

I think this court 'thing' has a lot more story behind it.

[October's Autumn]

"Actually, that is exactly what docetism is. I looked it up." -October's Autumn-

The definition is good. Your saying I was referring to that particular heresy, was incorrect.

 

Gotcha...

 

-------------------------------

"Please let us know if you object to the label of 'fundamentalist'!" -McKenna-

As a matter of fact, I do object. If you need to put a prefix on an otherwise good description, I would say, 'Historic' Christian, 'fundamental' Christian ( not the -ist; 'fundamental' has also been used to denegrate rather than be accurate), or 'Orthodox' Christian, or even 'Traditional' Christian would be much more appropos.

 

From what I've seen fundamentalist fits even if you don't like it, as you said "if the shoe fits." Historic is wishful thinking on the part of fundamentalists. Orthodox belongs to the Greek (Orthodox Greek) or Orthodox Jews. Neither is nothing orthodox about what you've posted here. Not traditional either because what you consider traditional is fairly modern. Your brand of Christianity is recent. You might want to do some research on your tradition(s). You might be surprised... I know I was.

[TheGreatWhiteBuffalo]

-From: TheGreatWhiteBuffalo-

Q:

1-"A common flaw in religious teachings is that we are all sinners, I agree that we are all not perfect, but we are perfectly created by our creator are we not?

2-So would GOD also be evil?

3- The message of the Bible should be LOVE,..."

 

A:

1-God's teaching is not flawed, we are! (1 John 1:8) Agreed, we are not perfect (AKA: sinners). We are not perfect because we rebel against God and His Law, and we just can't seem to help ourselves! We want to be perfect, but we like to sin!

We are not perfectly created. Didn't we just agree we're not perfect. Com' on!

2-No

3-If the message of the Bible should be love, what is it?

 

If you can't see Jesus and the works and words of Jesus written in the Bible then how is it that you can call yourself a Christian? Without God communicating (this Bible, this Word of God) His truth to us, how could we know?

 

I think this court 'thing' has a lot more story behind it.

 

Hi DavidK

 

In A:

 

1. Again define sin and also perfection (My answer goes like this, just because I am not perfect, that does not mean I inteded to sin or go against any law of GOD or man. On occassion I will make a mistake but in the past several years it is other people making mistakes and I am their victim either I get blamed or singled out for some odd reason in many cases I am totally and purely innocent.

 

2. I am glad that we agree that our GOD can not and is not evil, so which GOD planted the tree to test Adam and Eve? Hint if the story was more than mere myth then there would be a tree planted by an evil god, that god would have appeared as an agent of light to the world walking with man and woman on the earth and then trapping them into a despicable fall.

 

3. Have you really tested the word of GOD written in the Bible, remember Jesus commanded us to be on the search for 'tRuTh' even in the word of GOD have you obeyed the teaching of Jesus? You can narrow the whole text down to one word and that word is Love, the entire Ten Commandments can be reduced to this simple phrase, "Help others, Tell the tRuTh" For if you do this you will honor the one true GOD and you will not have any other GOD before this one GOD ect...

 

As for what is behind that simple court case, yes there is quite a story to be told, an innocent man who gives his life to GOD and his heart to Jesus makes a promise not to curse and of course what does he get charged with? Another man is profane and our innocent victim me, I get blamed with another person's words and characterized by a bunch of liars to be a man that I am not. How many false accusations can one person bear? Yes there is a big story here...

 

I do hope many eyes open and many ears hear as people speak truth, with power and conviction that such an injustice will not happen again.

 

We have a Constitution to uphold and if our leaders and fellow citizens do not love the Constitution and the human rights in the First 10 Amendments known as the Bill of Rights then they become the terorrists. These are our Civil liberties and if anyone does not support this simple code then they are a traitor to the American Dream along with the Liars and Cheats that are guilty of treason. There are so many laws civil and criminal along with the Biblical and they should all work together for the good of society our Democracy will fail if we do not revere the 'tRuTh' above all... There is only one 'tRuTh'

 

I'm going to check out the other thread here and come back to this tomorrow GOD willing,

 

I thank you for responding and hope encourage mutual growth in knowing the Love of GOD and the word, Love...

[davidk]

TGWB:

 

1.

I know exactly what you mean, and sometimes family's the worst, and friends even disappoint you. I can't control the way everybody else misbehaves, that's on their heads even if I get hurt in the process. All we can do is to continue to tell the truth and behave like it. They will get their reward, and so will you. God will see to that! It sometimes takes a while for truth to get through the tangle of lies, but it will always prevail.

Since we're imperfect, we miss the mark, and that is what sin means "missing the mark', regardless of our best intentions. God is benevolant, sometimes we sin and don't even know it. Only God is perfect.

I have obligated myself to act and respond the way Jesus wants even when I don't want to. But sometimes I do respond to someone or thing the wrong way or I do something wrong. I don't intend to, but I get myself ahead of everything and do it anyway. I'll slip under that red light or get on a web site (no comments) I shouldn't. And it's every day I find myself doing things and thinking things I know I need to avoid. Read Romans 7:15 thru 25, I found Paul having the same kind of struggle.

2.

There's only one God and He told them it was there and He warned "don't touch it"! The Fall was man's choice, just like our behavior is our choice, we are not machines, we're disobedient on purpose. It was Satan's lie. (He's not a god.)

3.

"Have you really tested the word of GOD written in the Bible, remember Jesus commanded us to be on the search for 'tRuTh' even in the word of GOD ...?"

Remind me.

Jesus has already condensed the 10 down to 2 simple commands, when He said in Mk 12:30-31, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength. And the second is this, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these." Love is to point vertically first, then horizontally. Any less than these 2 commands would make it greater than these. He said you can't do that. That is the truth. One can't sufficiently fill our need.

 

"We have a Constitution to uphold...", that is a fierce battle as well.

-------------------------

 

Autumn:

I was really hoping I wouldn't have to type all this.

 

fundamentalism \ ,'fundu'mentl,izem \ n [ 'fundamental + ism]1 : a militantly conservative movement in American Protestantism originating around the beginning of the 20th century in opposition to late 19th century modernist (liberalism) tendencies...

 

Since 'militantly' is the controlling word in this definition, there is no need to continue. Therefore, I prefer, in this order:

 

historic \ hi'storek \ or historical [fr. L historicus ( fr' Gk historikos exact, precise, historical...] 1 a : of, relating to, or having the character of history esp. as distinguished from myth or legend.

 

fundamental \ 'funde,'ment l \adj [fr. L fundamentalis of a foundation, fr. L fundamentum + -alis ] 1 : producing, supporting, regulating, or conditioning something ; BASIC, UNDERLYING - often used with responsibility. a : serving as an original or generating source : being the one from which others are derived. b : serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function; ...

 

orthodox \'o( r ) the,daks\ adj [fr LL orthodoxus, fr LGk orthodoxos, fr Gk orthodoxien to have the right opinion, fr ortho- straight, right, true + -doxien ( fr doxa opinion, belief, reputation) 1 : marked by conformity to doctrines or practices esp. in religion that are held as right or true by some authority, standard, or tradition as a : conforming to the Christian faith as formulated in the church creeds and confessions b : according to or congruous with the doctrines of Scripture as interpreted in some standard - contrasted with heretical and heterodox .

 

tradition \ tre'dishn \ n [fr, L tradition-, traditio action of handing over, teaching tradition]... 3 : an inherited or established way of thinking, feeling, or doing : a cultural attitude, belief, custom, instutution preserved from the past : usage or custom rooted in the past.

 

traditional \ tra'dishenl \ adj [ML traditionalis, fr. L tradition-, traditis tradition + alis -al ] 1 : of or relating to tradition; consisting or derived from tradition : ... .

 

What exactly do you believe my brand of Christianity is?

[soma]

From today's post I would say you are a loving growing Christian like the rest of us.

[October's Autumn]

What exactly do you believe my brand of Christianity is?

 

 

From what I've seen here and your obsession with dogma and doctrine you come across as a fundamentalist. I've lived and grown up around fundamentalist and conservative Christians. Both of whom assume they are "orthodox" or "historical" Christians when in fact they know almost nothing of the historical Christianities. (Yes, there are multiple ones). They are also often overly concerned about who is included and who is not included under the umbrella of Christianity.

 

Since you are interested in beliefs here are some questions:

 

What do you think/believe about:

 

Woman as senior pastors?

 

Women and Men in relationship to one another in marriage?

 

Marriage of people who are of the same gender?

 

Dinosaurs being around long before humans and being gone before humans were on the earth?

 

Evolution?

 

The bible as the word of God?

 

7 day creation?

 

Noah's Ark?

 

What is the story of Sodom & Gomorrah about?

 

What is the book of Revelation about?

 

Jesus' Resurrection?

 

Virgin Birth?

 

What is/was the Good News that is referred to in Matthew, Mark, Luke?

 

Are there contradictions in the bible?

[October's Autumn]

From www.m-w.com

 

fundamentalism

 

Main Entry:

fun·da·men·tal·ism Listen to the pronunciation of fundamentalism

Pronunciation:

\-tə-ˌli-zəm\

Function:

noun

Date:

1922

 

1 aoften capitalized : a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching b: the beliefs of this movement c: adherence to such beliefs2: a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles <Islamic fundamentalism> <political fundamentalism>

 

 

Main Entry:

1or·tho·dox Listen to the pronunciation of 1orthodox

Pronunciation:

\ˈȯr-thə-ˌdäks\

Function:

adjective

Etymology:

Middle English orthodoxe, from Middle French or Late Latin; Middle French orthodoxe, from Late Latin orthodoxus, from Late Greek orthodoxos, from Greek orth- + doxa opinion — more at doxology

Date:

15th century

 

1 a: conforming to established doctrine especially in religion b: conventional2capitalized : of, relating to, or constituting any of various conservative religious or political groups: as a: eastern orthodox b: of or relating to Orthodox Judaism

— or·tho·dox·ly adverb

 

 

Main Entry:

his·tor·i·cal Listen to the pronunciation of historical

Pronunciation:

\-i-kəl\

Function:

adjective

Date:

15th century

 

1 a: of, relating to, or having the character of history <historical data> b: based on history <historical novels> c: used in the past and reproduced in historical presentations2: famous in history : historic a3 a: secondary 1c b: diachronic <historical grammar>

— his·tor·i·cal·ness Listen to the pronunciation of historicalness \-i-kəl-nəs\ noun

 

tradition

 

Main Entry:

tra·di·tion Listen to the pronunciation of tradition

Pronunciation:

\trə-ˈdi-shən\

Function:

noun

Etymology:

Middle English tradicioun, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French tradicion, from Latin tradition-, traditio action of handing over, tradition — more at treason

Date:

14th century

 

1 a: an inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior (as a religious practice or a social custom) b: a belief or story or a body of beliefs or stories relating to the past that are commonly accepted as historical though not verifiable2: the handing down of information, beliefs, and customs by word of mouth or by example from one generation to another without written instruction3: cultural continuity in social attitudes, customs, and institutions4: characteristic manner, method, or style <in the best liberal tradition>

 

 

Main Entry:

1con·ser·va·tive Listen to the pronunciation of 1conservative

Pronunciation:

\kən-ˈsər-və-tiv\

Function:

adjective

Date:

14th century

 

1: preservative2 a: of or relating to a philosophy of conservatism bcapitalized : of or constituting a political party professing the principles of conservatism: as (1): of or constituting a party of the United Kingdom advocating support of established institutions (2): progressive conservative 3 a: tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions : traditional b: marked by moderation or caution <a conservative estimate> c: marked by or relating to traditional norms of taste, elegance, style, or manners 4: of, relating to, or practicing Conservative Judaism

 

There is no individual entry for traditional.

 

I copied and pasted

[davidk]

From what I've seen here and your obsession with dogma and doctrine you come across as a fundamentalist. I've lived and grown up around fundamentalist and conservative Christians. Both of whom assume they are "orthodox" or "historical" Christians when in fact they know almost nothing of the historical Christianities. (Yes, there are multiple ones). They are also often overly concerned about who is included and who is not included under the umbrella of Christianity.

 

Since you are interested in beliefs here are some questions:.\

 

Why this obsession on labeling me?

 

The Bible mentions only one Christ.

 

Since Christians know the only way to God, they are naturally concerned about the lost.

 

I believe the Bible is the Word of God. I believe it is God's propositional communication to Man. I believe where it touches History, Cosmology, Philosophy, or Spirituality, It is absolutely true.

The truth of Christianity is that it is true to what is there. Chritianity is not only true to the dogmas, it is not only true to what God has said in the Bible, but it is also true to what is there. It is not approximate, it is really true.

This is what truth is from the Christian viewpoint and as God sets it forth in Scripture. Christianity is not a theological pantheism. The infinite-personal God, who is the Trinity, has spoken. He is not silent! He has given us the answers.

 

We need not, in fact, cannot find the answers within ourselves.

[TheGreatWhiteBuffalo]

This is what truth is from the Christian viewpoint and as God sets it forth in Scripture. Christianity is not a theological pantheism. The infinite-personal God, who is the Trinity, has spoken. He is not silent! He has given us the answers.

 

We need not, in fact, cannot find the answers within ourselves.

 

GOD has spoken and continues to speak, but you won't allow the GOD in others to live just as Jesus was killed so to have Christians and Christianity killed the GOD that they want to exist and live on forever, the flaws and contradictions do exist in the Bible and if the Bible was true you would have to agree with me that the Bible was flawed, but how can I make a positively negative statement such as the Bible is flawed, well the truth is that you haven't come to know me and what I know, you have not yet searched all of my writings to know that I do speak the tRuTh of knowing a personal GOD that can also speak to you not only through the pure and holy texts found in the Bible but also in the pure and holy texts found in other religions. When you bridge all religions with One Loving, Pure and Holy GOD then you will come to know the One True GOD, the Creator of ALL tRuTh...

 

A scribe for GOD would do his best to write the Pure and Holy tRuTh which is the One and Only tRuTh...

 

The Love of Ruth for Boaz was a true Love, not many people get that...

 

The Love of Ruth was true also for Naomi... The Love of Ruth was true also for the Son of Naomi... See?

 

Ruth was a true Love...

 

 

------------

 

McKenna:

 

I would like to address other posts and questions, particularly McKenna and her questions about Tough Love,

 

I'm not certain that I will be permitted to post again in the next several hours so I'll try to just quickly point out that I'm not aware of Jesus using tough Love on people.

 

Martha the Sister of Mary Magdalene, maybe she was bothered by Mary not attending to the cooking needs and failed to see that all she had to do was put her trust in the hands of Jesus and the needs would be met, if not by Jesus himself maybe by a bunch of people who had gathered around to be nourished by the words of Jesus, Martha failed to trust and obey the Lord. I know others that have failed to trust and obey...

 

We should not allow others to justify their sins by hiding behind an evil spirit; a criminal should be made or held accountable for their actions.

 

The innocent should be set free... There are innocent people in this world, they are truth tellers, and you will know them by their fruits, their words of nourishment. Sometimes you feel uneasy by knowing the truth of another, but the truth is always true and there is only one truth. I could show you several stories where people have been hurt by the court system and the Church...

 

Tough Love has proven to be hatred in disguise... People have even been permitted to lie in order to convict the innocent for Loves sake... Pure hatred...

 

------------

 

Octobers Autumn,

 

Thank You, I would like to answer your questions, I was currently listening to,"Drift away, give me the people to free my soul"

 

What do you think/believe about:

 

Woman as senior pastors? --Certainly no problem; they could even be president one day, but not this day as the best candidate is a man...

 

Women and Men in relationship to one another in marriage? --Absolutely, that is the creation of a family where two are gathered or even more... There that is where you find the creator in Love...

 

Marriage of people who are of the same gender? --No, they can have a Civil Union, but not a marriage that is strictly limited to one man and one woman, the marriage can be dissolved in extreme circumstances, and divorce should be a last resort.

 

Dinosaurs being around long before humans and being gone before humans were on the earth? -- Could be and yet might not be true, considering that the time line is broken with only limited remains the truth is not yet revealed, the evolution of man could coincide with the life cycle of the Dinosaur, in other words our ancestors could have lived in a world with Dinosaurs, different life forms could have decayed or evaporated unlike larger animals whose remains that we manage to find or unearth from a time long ago.

 

Evolution? --Yes, we change and grow... we can even de-evolve...

 

The bible as the word of God? --The word of GOD is in the Bible but the Bible is not entirely the word and work of GOD, the Bible has been manipulated many times...

 

7 day creation? -- As a day is counted how long is a day to GOD?

 

Noah's Ark? -- The story is flawed many times over, all over the world we have a problem with this story, the Earth only contains a fixed amount of contents, ie, water and solid with a molten core bubbling up and out to the surface to create the land masses, a complete covering of all of the land once the land masses have been established becomes a great exaggeration and quite a myth. I'm fully aware that the Earth has gone through and continues to go through many changes, starting out much smaller than it is this day and continuing to grow, even when we lose the polar ice caps in the age of heat we will not see a global flood where all of the land is covered by water, impossible! What can happen is there could be catastrophic events with many changes as the inner core could be compressed with greater pressure causing more frequent geologic disturbances...

 

What is the story of Sodom & Gomorrah about? --There are a lot of lessons to this story, again a lesson of Love and how to Love is first and most important, follow directions.

 

What is the book of Revelation about? -- The end of the era, we could end the world as we have this power in our own hands, since we did not create the world why should we care about what has been created? We could make the Earth new by caring about the Earth and Others, because if we care for others we also care for the Earth.

 

Jesus' Resurrection? -- Having appeared to them who watched according to the texts that were written a man Jesus was crucified and appeared to be dead and put into a burial cave that a stone was rolled in front of and Jesus resuscitates, surprise, surprise, surprise... Suppose there was an illusion of a man dying or being killed? Now if the illusion really worked how deeply would Mary Magdalene fall in love with a man that she thought she would have lost? Talk about glued together for Life... Jesus for her could never do anything wrong, not only that he might want to get out of the limelight after that experience, having survived do you think anyone coming so close to death would want to continue any type of ministry where he is only trying to help people hear, see and speak?

 

Virgin Birth? -- Mary Mother of Jesus was impregnated by Joseph, she feared the stigma, and they decided to keep the child, Jesus was their love child or their child of Love...

 

What is/was the Good News that is referred to in Matthew, Mark, Luke? -- We no longer needed to sacrifice any animals for the sins of others... We failed to get the accountability in the right place; we do not allow people to get away with criminal behavior. The way to being forgiven is to ask and state your apology to the one you have hurt and then to GOD.

 

Are there contradictions in the bible? -- Absolutely, Yes, and yes again... There are both contradictions and grammatical errors.

 

 

----------

 

Whew! What a post, I hope that the many questions that I raise will be given proper consideration and a continued dialogue develops that we can explore a path to a cure for what has hurt our world and many living as our neighbors...

[Realspiritik]

Why this obsession on labeling me?

 

The Bible mentions only one Christ.

 

Since Christians know the only way to God, they are naturally concerned about the lost.

 

I believe the Bible is the Word of God. I believe it is God's propositional communication to Man. I believe where it touches History, Cosmology, Philosophy, or Spirituality, It is absolutely true.

The truth of Christianity is that it is true to what is there. Chritianity is not only true to the dogmas, it is not only true to what God has said in the Bible, but it is also true to what is there. It is not approximate, it is really true.

This is what truth is from the Christian viewpoint and as God sets it forth in Scripture. Christianity is not a theological pantheism. The infinite-personal God, who is the Trinity, has spoken. He is not silent! He has given us the answers.

 

We need not, in fact, cannot find the answers within ourselves.

 

Good grief, does anybody know what Davidk is talking about? To paraphrase Chandler from Friends, "Could Davidk's creed be less clear?"

 

Davidk, you say:

I believe where it touches History, Cosmology, Philosophy, or Spirituality, It is absolutely true.

 

How about where it touches REAL LIFE? How about where it touches publicly funded education, and publicly funded health care, and protection for the environment, and equal treatment before the law and before society for those of colour; for the disabled (like military vets); for children; for gays and lesbians; for women; and on and on and on.

 

The Trinity is barely present in the Bible (Matthew 28:19 is pretty slim pickings). Meanwhile, we have tons of teachings from Jesus about compassionate treatment for the disadvantaged. Why don't you ever talk about Jesus' core teachings, Davidk? Why do you so frequently appeal to Paul (whose thinking is frequently manipulative and paranoid) and to John, who clearly has a hate-on for Jews (John 8:42-47).

 

You pick and choose the parts of the Bible that suit you, and you leave out the inconvenient parts that don't mesh with your theory that only Christians know the way to God (those inconvenient parts would include the vast majority of the Jesus sayings in the Synoptics, and Jesus' own message about the disadvantaged in society being loved by God despite and in direct opposition to the prevailing Judaic and Hellenistic view at the time that the disadvantaged "deserved" their misery because they were being "punished" by God).

 

I also leave out parts of the Bible. I have already acknowledged what those parts are. I ignore all parts of the Bible that promote hierarchy, patriarchy, and inequality of souls in God's eyes. I keep all the parts that help me understand Jesus' radical teachings about love and equality.

 

Davidk, please be honest that you do not accept all scripture with equal enthusiasm. You prefer some passages over others. You do not seem to treat the practical sayings and teachings of Jesus with the same reverence that you treat soteriology. Just please be honest.

 

Jen

[October's Autumn]

Why this obsession on labeling me?

 

 

It is your obsession.

 

You denied being a fundamentalist but everything you said screams fundamentalist.

[Wayseer]

Since Christians know the only way to God,

 

Sorry to jump in here but this statement can be challenged.

 

Let's reverse the words a bit and see what we get. 'Christianity is the only way to God'.

 

Are you sure? What do you think of other 'ways' of knowing GOD? If there is only one way, what happens to all those 'others'?

 

We now live in the 21st Century and our tribal past may linger in some corners of society but such a singularity ignores some 200 years of theological and scientific reform which makes such a 'belief' redundant. The Hubble telescope reveals that 78 Billion Light Years does not get to the end of the universe yet 'Christianity is the only way to GOD'. Such a grand and universal blanket statement seems to fly in the face of the rather insignificant part we occupy in the scheme of things.

[TheGreatWhiteBuffalo]

Sorry to jump in here but this statement can be challenged.

 

Let's reverse the words a bit and see what we get. 'Christianity is the only way to God'.

 

Are you sure? What do you think of other 'ways' of knowing GOD? If there is only one way, what happens to all those 'others'?

 

We now live in the 21st Century and our tribal past may linger in some corners of society but such a singularity ignores some 200 years of theological and scientific reform which makes such a 'belief' redundant. The Hubble telescope reveals that 78 Billion Light Years does not get to the end of the universe yet 'Christianity is the only way to GOD'. Such a grand and universal blanket statement seems to fly in the face of the rather insignificant part we occupy in the scheme of things.

 

Since Christians know the only way to God, <=> 'Christianity is the only way to God'.

 

Define Christianity -

 

To me knowing what is right from what is wrong is a sign that you are a child of GOD because you have GOD given intelligence to know GOD. Now if you believe in your heart that Jesus existed then you are a disciple of Jesus and can claim if you want to that you are a Christian and to get to heaven Christians know the only way as do other cultures and people who know the truth. Again the truth becomes and important aspect along with Love. We have to know right from wrong and true love. Did the Great Spirit of GOD come to the world? Do you believe in GOD the Great Spirit? Where did life come from? Where did the world come from? Could the Universe have always existed infinite, vast beyond all of our wildest imaginings? Could there have been Mass, Gas, Matter always and forever changing in form and function for eternity? Are our little lives precious?

 

What are some of the Blessings and Contradictions in the Bible?

 

Check out this:

 

http://tgwbmypreaching.blogspot.com/2008/0...ew-18-1-35.html

 

Is there a problem?

 

I think there is... I think the Mark was missed... What would GOD think?