U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-23-2008, 07:58 AM
 
Location: St. Joseph Area
6,237 posts, read 8,261,962 times
Reputation: 3093

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally posted by grannynancy
I don't understand how you can say liberal Christians do not repent. I bet many of them repent MORE than fundamentalists because they live "in the balance" and must struggle with God's intent - because the law is not for them "black and white", right and wrong is situational at times.

Maybe my core assumption is wrong. In my mind fundamentalists class, as liberal, any Christian who does not follow their views.

I gather anyone who works for social justice, peace, etc. is a "liberal Christian"
Hi grannynancy, I should clarify my last post. There are two types of liberal: Theologically liberal, and politically liberal.

Theology: I've always thought of "liberal christians" as christians who 1) don't believe in the authority of the bible and 2) deny the historic teachings of the church as laid out in the Bible.

This would include

1) denying the resurrection and return of christ
2) denying that christ alone is the way to the father
3) denying the resurrection of the dead and the coming judgement of christ
4) denying the divinity of christ. (ie. he's just a good teacher)

The list could go on, but basically it's denying the central historic tenets of the faith laid down by Jesus and his apostles (via scripture). I didn't mean to say that people who go to a "liberal" church are not christians. I've met christians from liberal denominations. If that's the way it sounded, then I'm sorry.

Political. Now here, there's much more freedom for the christian. As for me, I'm conservative--pro life on abortion, but I also lean pacifist. I'm big on helping the poor and not judging them as "lazy bums" While I think homosexuality is wrong, I'm indifferent toward gay marriage. So I'm theologically conservative, but politically, I guess I'm moderate, from a fundamentalist's point of view.

Quote:
I gather anyone who works for social justice, peace, etc. is a "liberal Christian"
On the contrary, I think conservative christians should be MUCH more involved with social justice. It's sad when the Iraq war broke out, the conservative churches basically cheered it on. I was the only one who was thinking of the human cost. Because of stuff like that I sometimes feel like a liberal among conservatives
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-23-2008, 08:05 AM
 
Location: NW Arkansas
3,978 posts, read 7,478,457 times
Reputation: 3755
The following quote sure caught my eye!

"That is a sin...it's wasting the seed, "

Can anyone imagine how huge the population would be if every 'seed' that was 'dropped' became a child !!!!! I am not one to dwell on the human sex relations, but I will quarantee very few 'couplings' are for the purpose of procreating!

I recall the OT scripture that I believe the poster is refering to, and I believe it is taken out of context.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2008, 09:25 AM
 
3,627 posts, read 12,438,522 times
Reputation: 2682
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackinac81 View Post

Theology: I've always thought of "liberal christians" as christians who 1) don't believe in the authority of the bible and 2) deny the historic teachings of the church as laid out in the Bible.

This would include

1) denying the resurrection and return of christ
2) denying that christ alone is the way to the father
3) denying the resurrection of the dead and the coming judgement of christ
4) denying the divinity of christ. (ie. he's just a good teacher)
But many Christians believe all the above but differ on the role of "the law" in our lives and do not nterpret the Bible literally down to words which were interpreted in a 1611 translation, and having to decide which English words best met the meaning of the original Hebrew and Greek, particularly when they did not have equivalent words, and the styles of writing of the time etc.

So the literal thing just does not set for me -that to me was part of the problem with Old Testament man - life is NOT black and white.

I think we owe it to the Bible to really understand the original meaning in the original context and not assume because folks who were working for an English King [who wanted the translation to also support the power of earthly kings - and much of the document was translating from translations instead of the source writings] really had the tools at hand to get all the details "right" - - - Even though the fundamental message comes through.

The law is important but the law does not steer the boat - it tells us where the landmines are, and reminds us we cannot get through life without blowing some up no matter what we do so we need someone to rescue us. Sometimes we have to figure out which landmine is going to do the most damage to the boat as well and hit one to avoid the other - such is the human state. The overly pious Christian may know how to avoid the landmines but decides that to save his brother he will not drive the boat through the minefield but around it so as not to damage his boat - his primary goal is preservation of the boat, so he will let his brother die. Other Christians would plow through the minefiled knowing that saving his brother is the ultimate goal and if he looses his life, he has lost nothing because God is helping him steer the boat and even if he blows it to smithereens, he will be rescued by the Grace of God.

Sola fide - does not preclude the law but the law takes on a new perspective:

Wikipedia - yes it is a wiki but why are we on forums if not for collective knowledge:
Sola fide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So what do you call someone who is not a fundamentalist or a literalist but believes the items you state?

Last edited by grannynancy; 10-23-2008 at 09:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2008, 11:47 AM
 
Location: St. Joseph Area
6,237 posts, read 8,261,962 times
Reputation: 3093
Quote:
Originally posted by grannynancy
But many Christians believe all the above but differ on the role of "the law" in our lives and do not nterpret the Bible literally down to words which were interpreted in a 1611 translation, and having to decide which English words best met the meaning of the original Hebrew and Greek, particularly when they did not have equivalent words, and the styles of writing of the time etc.
I'll be honest. I'm not a theologian when it comes to the OT law, so I won't dwell too much on that. Suffice to say Christians, from christ's death on the cross has freed us from that by fulfilling the law so we wouldn't have to. I'm not a legalist, but I'm not against the law either. I also don't own a KJV bible. I'm an ESV/NIV guy. But anyway....I like to err on the literal side of things. Did God really make the sun stand still for Joshua? Why not? he's God. I'll take his word at it. And while I have no problem with "old earth" creationists, I personally think the earth was created in seven days. That to me is not as important.

Quote:
So what do you call someone who is not a fundamentalist or a literalist but believes the items you state?


I refer to myself as "orthodox" with a small "o" That means I adhere to the historically correct "orthodox" christian teachings as they're laid out by Jesus, taught by his apostles and preserved in the Bible. These teachings include everything written in the apostle's and nicene creeds, that were also adhered to by the Reformers. (Luther, Calvin, etc)

Basically, I agree with a lot of fundamentalists on basic doctrine. My problem with fundamentalism is the lack of tolerance for other christian traditions. They're pretty militant and hard edged, even toward other conservative christians. And if you're not baptist/nondenominational, you're looked on with suspicion.

So maybe that makes me a "moderate fundamentalist" But I like the term orthodox much better
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top