darby

For a different perspective... I know many on this board need to completely understand. Please don't take offense at this, but I just don't. As Paul said, now we see dimly, etc. etc. As I have watched this post go on and on, do any of you just get more frustrated? Is there a point where you'll say, "aaahhh, that's it, now I've got it?" Understand, I'm not arguing for an ignorant, non-questioning approach to Christianity. It just seems like a thread like this could go on forever, with no one person being completely satisfied. Like arguing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. Again, I'm not trying to insult your quest for understanding....just wondering, to what end? During a post like this I'm also reminded and impreseed by the extreme intelligence represented on the board...and how I fall woefully short!

Rather than take communion in our large meetings (2 services, about 600 at each one), we take communion in our home fellowship groups. We share a meal and then take communion, pray, etc. This has made communion much more real to me. As an aside, communion is one of the specific times the Bible says we are to "examine ourselves." Jesus said we do it in remembrance of Him, and I think it's interesting that Paul said that when we do it we "proclaim the Lord's death till He comes."

Ok, but Wallis does more than just value the Pope's consistency...he focuses on where the Pope's postitions align with his--poverty, anti-war, etc. He doesn't seem compelled to challenge his own views on other topics, as he would have supporters of Terry Schiavo do. Just seems slanted to me.

Wallis seems like a nice, even tempered man. I've seen him on TV and felt the same way. This article, however, is one sided. If the issue is CONSISTENCY, as Wallis writes, then ALL sides need to assess their views in light of the Pope's...whether that be anti-war, poverty, sexual immorality, abortion. Does Wallis agree with the Pope's views on abortion and homosexuality and women's roles? Doesn't the challenge to not pick and choose which of the Pope's views we agreed apply just as much to him and others as it is to Bush et al? He doesn't mention it, if it doews. Will Wallis begin to see these issues as the Pope did? In his words, "Somehow, I doubt it."

This post has been mostly too deep for me, but I thought I would chime in here. I believe a Christian, after conversion, is a "new creature in Christ." The old has passed away, etc. This all relates to our new identity. However, as Paul talks about, we still have some portion of ourselves that is unredeemed...i.e. the flesh. This is what is at war with our "new spirit," and why we don't always do the things indicative of our new spirit. While there are different thoughts on why God would leave a portion (the flesh) unredeemed after conversion, I think it keeps us from being God, as we are constantly aware of our old sinful nature (and can certainly still sin).

No....but again, how does my fear harm him?? Or his fear for me? Doesn't affect me at all, I might add.

For the record.... I was thinking of many of my recent posts, and I want to make sure you all understand that I am not hung up on wrath, hell, damnation, sin, etc. I know that is a common perception of conservative Christians, and my posts have played into that perhaps. I, like most of you, believe just as strongly in love, mercy, grace, redemption, peace, selflessness, etc. I think I talk about some of the other ideas HERE just to provide a balance to the discussion. If I was on a fundamental, hellfire and brimstone forum, I'd challenge them on the mercy, love, grace, etc. issues. As I've said before, it's not an "either/or" thing for me. Just want to make sure you guys know I'm not just a doom and gloom guy. My goal in life is to "walk as He walked," in all His fullness, putting my own desires, tendencies, likes/dislikes, aside.

des- don't have long tonight (putting the kids to bed!) I can buy your argument, although you know I have a different take. I guess my issue is that it appears that most of what many on this board see through "cultural experience" are verses on hell, hellfire, sin, wrath, exclusivity, etc. Essentially, the unpleasant verses, that make all of us squirm. But then, aren't other verses on sharing, giving, loving neighbor as self, etc. up for grabs as well? Why are they more historically dependable, or believable, or whatever? What is the guideline, if any, to decide what is acceptable, or what Jesus actually said, etc.? It becomes very easy for us to just pick and choose, as each sees fit, IMO. I think someone on a post long ago summed up my outlook...I don't take the Bible always literally, but try to interpret it as written. I won't take liberties, etc. that I don't see the Bible giving me. As always, I enjoy the dialogue.

Panta, I agree the Holy Spirit is alive and well and revealing new things to us...just not anything that would contradict scripture. Enhance, or explain deeper, yes, but not contradict. Fred, I agree this is where finding agreement probably hits a wall. Finally, let me ask all of you....are there beliefs that you think could lead a person to hell/hades/eternal separation from God? (for the sake of arguement, not worrying about the different interpretations of hell/hellfire/separation). I mean, are there some people/groups, whose beliefs are so wacked out and sinful, that they are damned (again, using whatever your interpretation of damned is). Or is every path valid?

Cynthia, no offense taken. I would argue WE, through our sin, have excluded ourselves from Him, not the other way around. My main point is that all of us (including you progressive friends of mine) believe there are right/wrong beliefs and dangerous beliefs. And when you see what you feel are wrong/dangerous beliefs, you guys are pretty adamant about addressing them. So the difference is not so much in whether some groups are open minded and others not, but rather WHAT THINGS we are all open minded about. Most of you are every bit as opinionated as I am, I think.

Walter Wink must throw out huge portions of the Old Testament, then. The God represented in the OT is a very jealous God. That was His main issue with the Israelites, time and time again--that they were "adulterous," worshipping other gods and idols.

If Jesus IS the only way, then it is not destructive, but rather paramount, to spread such a belief.

Beach, I understand that fear can be greatly abused. I'm just not willing to discard all the verses (both old and new test) that talk about fear of God, hell, hellfire, etc. I am open to discussing verses, meanings, etc., but I do not take the liberty of passing over verses I don't agree with in my flesh. I know I hold the Bible more literally than you, so that is where our disagreement is. And I realize you have been hurt by those who, IMO, have completely misused/abused "fear" and it's correct connotations. As I've said before, I'm sorry for that.

I agree with "seasoned with salt" and further, speaking the truth IN LOVE. The how is usually as important, if not more, than the what in our communication. Certainly we have lost, in a major way, the ability to civilly debate ideas.

I'm in full agreement that control, manipulation, and abuse are wrong. My point (similar to Alethia's several day's ago) is that warning someone of something you think is dangerous or harmful (hell in this case) is no more manipulative than warning someone of dangerous road conditions, a live electrical wire, drowing, etc. In both cases, it is your concern for that individual, not some selfish desire to manipulate/abuse, that should motivate you.

Jeep- I've seen you question parts of the Bible (and now the book of John). I don't mean this rudely, but to understand, what parts of the Bible DO you believe and consider "non-cult" books?

Fred- I think you are right. When I use scripture on this board, I try to use mostly Jesus' own words, because I know many here don't put much weight in the words of Paul and others. And Jesus talked about hell quite a lot. Anyone claiming Christianity (wherever on the spectrum) or even curious about it has to deal with the doctrine of hell.

Alethia- Sorry for the tough time...hang in there, and rest in the Lord. I will be praying for you. As I have said before, while I may at times disagree, and at others not understand , you've always written with sincerity and in a very Christ-like manner.

Whatever it (hell) is, it is clearly not good, can we agree? And Jesus is clearly warning us against it. And reminding us to fear God to avoid it. So to pass that warning on would not be mean or manipulative

That was Jesus saying "fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Hell." So I don't see anything unhealthy, mean, manipulative, abusive, etc. about sharing with others what my Lord said Himself. Certainly that message can be delivered with compassion, concern, etc. But for me, to not say it would be anything but love. Jesus is sounding a very serious warning in that verse.

Beach- I haven't read the book, but I would caution you in making sweeping generalizations of conservative churches. Since I am member of one of those terrible churches, I'll make a few comments: 1. Our service is about as contemporary as they get--we've got a full band, show videos, etc. We're open to changing any methods, communication, etc., without changing the message 2. People are happy, joyful, some dressed casually (shorts), some wearing suits and dresses...pretty free, indeed. 3. We certainly don't teach "enslavement" of fear, but we do teach about, fear, because it is in the BIBLE. Just a quick search of the NT gave me these verses: Luke 1:50 "And His mercy is on those whofear Him from generation to generation". Matt 10:26 "Therefore do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Hell." There are many others, but the point is that we teach fear because Jesus, Paul, and others teach it--not out of some desire to manipulate people or abuse them. The key is that it is not a "fear" that causes us to be scared of God and run away from Him, but rather a deep respect of His holiness, power, might, etc. It causes me not to be casual about my sin or about who He is. And I run to Him with all my cares, concerns, frustrations, shortcomings, etc. That is the confidence I have in Christ Jesus.

I've always been fascinated about the whole discussion on "the right way." I believe Jesus is the right way to the Father, not in some arrogant, I'm better than you way, but because, among many other things, He said so. We're not supposed to lord that knowledge over people, but I dont' feel right staying silent about it either, because it is so important. I have to admit, I also don't understand why exclusivity offends so many. I'm not offended that JWs don't think I'm going to heaven--I try to engage them in dialogue, etc. But at the end of the day, if JWs, or Pagans, or whatever decide they've got it right and I've got it wrong, where is the harm? I'll vehemently disagree, but I'm not offended. They've got every right to believe what they want, don't they? Additionally, while Christians have done things over the years to bring hatred upon themselves (as have every other group who ever lived), we are also despised because of simply what we believe. Jesus promised we would be persecuted, much in the same way He was. Just for belief in Him, and His name, He said we would be despised.

This is exactly why evangelicals witness--we are EXTREMELY concerned about dangerous beliefs and the consequences. (I know this point has been made before). Not saying you have to buy into our beliefs, but understand it is precisely our concern over people that drives us to spread the gospel. I know many of you recognize this, but I also see many posts on this site that suggest that we have other intentions (usually selfish, hateful, close-minded, etc.) Alethia, this is not directed to you, since you are always pretty open to discussing the evangelical/conservative view. But again, progressives cannot use this standard for when to "say it," and then chastise evangelicals for speaking up when we feel there are "misinterpretations or misunderstandings." Again, not directed to you, Alethia, but just a general sense I get from postings on this board.

Des- Does McLaren have glasses? I was surfing the TV the night Larry King had those guests, and I think I remember him now. Just curious if he is the one I am thinking of. Wind Dancer-I'm going to pick up his book. Liberal socially and conservative theologically seems quite like Jesus. The drum I beat repeatedly here (I think everyone has a drum!) is that real Christianity is not one or the other, but both (social justice AND dealing with people's spriitual state).

des- Just to clarify, I'm not using the "welfare cheats" line as a conservative talking point--I'm talking about things I personally see weekly. This certainly does not mean all on welfare or assistance. But there is defdinitely a percentage. I guess I am also compare the poor in America to the poor I have observed in trips to Mexico, Guatemala, and Somalia. There is absolutely no comparison. This does not mean, however, that I don't have compassion for their situation. Just that sometimes those we call "poor" in America have cars, satellite dishes, all types of electronics, etc. Those in 3rd world countries are fortunate if they have a relatively dry home and food that night. The only two areas I have been in America that would come close to reaching those conditions would be the mountains of Appalachia, and the colonias in South Texas (small shanty towns that pop up on the U.S. side of the border). I have some friends who have ministered to the Native Americans in S. Dakota who speak about pretty bleak conditions as well. My main point was that I trust Christian organizations, who usually address a person's spriritual condition, instead of government solutions, who don't. As for the rich who screw the system, we ought to call them out as well (as is done here often!) Bro Rog- One can also not be truly Christian and indifferent to sin. God the Father is not indifferent in the Old Testament, nor is Jesus the Son or the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. This certainly includes, but is not limited to, the sin of social injustice. That's not all God is concerned with.