"Liberal Christian" is an oxymoron!

[Kathryn]

I'm not Roman Catholic. In the Apostle's Creed, the word "catholic" (as opposed to Catholic) means simply "universal."

Many denominations of Christians use this creed, in this form, using the word "catholic," in their services, including my own church, which at this moment happens to be a Methodist church.

That's because the members aren't weirded out by the word and assuming that it means Roman Catholic when it DOESN'T.

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

The only way someone will be able to believe and follow the One True Jesus is by the sovereign grace of God, resulting in the new birth. As sinners dead in our sins and trespasses, we are unable to give ourselves the new birth by choosing Jesus Christ, doing an altar call, or reciting a sinner's prayer apart from regeneration from the Spirit of God.

John 3
You Must Be Born Again

Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.” Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You [4] must be born again.’ 8 The wind [5] blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” - John3

 

[ChristineES]

Any one who is a Christian knows that we need to be born again- but what would that mean to someone who isn't a Christian? Even Nicodemus, who was a Pharisee and well versed in the Scriptures had trouble understanding it until Jesus explained it to him. I think you are expecting non-Christians to completely understand our scriptures- the way we see them. They won't. Even Paul said that a baby starts off with baby food (a baby being a new Christian).
I think if you are going to quote scriptures to non-Christians, you should explain what they mean to you.

 

[sojourner]

"You're sick. I hope this is tongue-in-cheek."

No, not all, that IS the Gospel message. Has been for 2000 yrs.

Believe or burn. A choice offered in the best Don Corelene tradition.

"And ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end."

Wrong. The gospel message is basically this: "Turn your lives around, for God's imperial rule has come near."
One gospel writer presents that message in the context of Jesus being the suffering servant. One presents it in the context of Jesus fulfilling the Law. One presents it in the context of comparing Jesus and God's kingdom in juxtaposition to Augustus and the Romans.
"Turn or burn," as far as I'm aware, has never been "the Biblical gospel message."

 

[sojourner]

My! Touchy aren't we?

I was merely pointing out that one only need READ the myth to understand what it says.

If you take it at face value and accept that it IS a divine revelation then the basic principals are fairly clear.

In the first place, it's not one myth. It's several. To cobble them together makes for very bad reading. Therefore, one not only need read the myth -- one needs to read the myths correctly for them to make any sense. We don't take it at face value. That was Kennedy's downfall. He pandered to the lowest common denominator instead of lifting the masses to better awareness.

 

[sojourner]

Not to get the basics. Finer points of esoteric theology maybe. But the "plan of salvation" is fairly simple.

Cal Thomas had a cute line I read some yrs back, I don't remember where but he was answering this complexity question.

"God's plan salvation can be put on a post card. Which shows how far ahead god was thinking."

Obviously, God's plan of salvation can't be put on a postcard. It would need to contain, not only the entire Bible, but the oral tradition of the Church.
His remark, while cute, is a cheap shot, and not very well thought out.

BTW, which plan are you referring to? There are many perspectives in the Bible.

 

[Waymarker]

I'm not Roman Catholic. In the Apostle's Creed, the word "catholic" (as opposed to Catholic) means simply "universal."

But you said-
"I believe in the Holy Ghost;
the holy catholic church"

I'd never say that myself, not ever in any way shape or form..

 

[sojourner]

I agree that, in principle, to commit to liberalism and Christianity is a contradiction- many manage it, and the result is a disaster like John Shelby Spong.

I think a Christian may have certain liberal opinions, but liberalism is the enemy of religion.

This such bull crap! Spong a disaster? He may be out on a limb theologically, but he makes us think in different ways (which is something conservatives aren't known for).
If Spong is a disaster, then I think we'd have to conclude that Jesus was a disaster. Which isn't true, either.

 

[sojourner]

Why? Omar has a right to his opinion.

So did Hitler.

 

[sojourner]

I could easily say the same thing about a number of things. We both would be wrong.

How do you know?
You don't
Your guessing through the lens of your own perspective.

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

But you said-
"I believe in the Holy Ghost;
the holy catholic church"

I'd never say that myself, not ever in any way shape or form..

The true church of God is catholic. All who are united to Christ by faith are part of the catholic church where Christ is the head.

 

[sojourner]

Okay let me put it another way- if a nonchristian came up to me and said "I want to learn about christianity", I'd give him/her a small slimline copy of one of the gospels to take home and read, and tell him/her to come back anytime for discussion etc.
Are you saying a gospel is not enough and that he/she must do study courses and stuff in order to understand it?

You would? That doesn't sound very effective (and it puts you -- the contact -- conveniently out of the loop and absolves you from any responsibility.) If someone wanted to know about Christianity, why wouldn't you say, "Follow me around for a week or two, observe me, do what I do, and you'll know?"

 

[sojourner]

What would you say to Paul's 'keep it simple' advice?-
"I'm worried lest you be led astray from the simplicity of Christ" (2 Cor 11:3)

The "simplicity of Christ" does not include the interpretational problem we find in the Bible.

 

[sojourner]

Bull. Sorry.
You'd be amazed for example at the difference
in the way the RC Church explains/uses the old testament connections,
compared to ... say the Baptists.

EVERYBODY READS (into) THINGS THEIR OWN WAY.
and makes/embraces their own connections.

no I'm not yelling.
Just expressing grandly. lol

Which is why we need exegesis (reading out of). That's where commentaries come in real handy. They counteract rampant eisegesis (reading into).

 

[sojourner]

Ah a Catholic..
Perhaps you could explain to us why they pray to dead humans (Mary and the 'saints') instead of directly to God and Jesus?

They don't. They ask the saints to intercede for them. That's not the same as "praying to them."

 

[blackout]

One man's trash is another man's treasure. I certainly don't consider serious study of the bible to be a waste of time - I've been studying the bible now for about 35 years and the more I think I know, the more I realize there is to learn. I don't know how or why you were studying the bible - and I don't know why you aren't now, but I can assure you that you didn't learn all there was to know about the bible in ten years. No one could - not if they devoted 20 hours a day seven days a week to that pursuit. Which neither you nor I have done.

I personally love to study - and not just the bible. Though I've been out of school now for over twenty years, I still seriously study topics simply for the pleasure of learning. By far, though, the most fascinating topics to me are those related to Christian doctrine and the history surrounding the development of that faith. But I also enjoy digging into political issues, sociological issues, health - you name it. I guess I'm a non fiction sort of gal.

For the record, as I stated generally before, I do not limit my study material to material that I think I will agree with. I read stuff from every sort of angle, and in doing so, I learn a lot and constantly challenge my own current set of beliefs.

........

You know Kathryn, I did not mean to come off as condescending or insulting in my previous post,
but very often people will say of those who have left (mainstream/"accepted") christianity,
that it was because they "did not study" or "didn't read the bible",
and I was stating that this was most definately NOT the case with me.
On top of all my general christian & catholic "study"....
I was also the only paid musician in a Roman Catholic parish (for almost 10 years),
which kept me in constant weekly connection with the ins and outs of the Liturgy.
(which I know doesn't "count" for all of you non liturgical types. )

Anyhow, once I experienced prolonged epiphany/ HEIGHTened Reality,
all of that "study" amounted to nothing.
The direct experience of gOd renders it all ... well... meh. eh.
Still I love the Kingdom Teachings, as they express exactly what I have seen.
(in gospel "terms"/terminology)

I do occasionally enjoy browsing parables and such again with New Eyes as well.

 

[blackout]

Which is why we need exegesis (reading out of). That's where commentaries come in real handy. They counteract rampant eisegesis (reading into).

Need? no.

Gnostic "commentary" is something I enjoy when it comes my way though.

 

[gzusfrk]

no! a liberal christian is someone on their way to becoming A christian

 

[Christian Pilgrim]

You know Kathryn, I did not mean to come off as condescending or insulting in my previous post,
but very often people will say of those who have left (mainstream/"accepted") christianity,
that it was because they "did not study" or "didn't read the bible",
and I was stating that this was most definately NOT the case with me.
On top of all my general christian & catholic "study"....
I was also the only paid musician in a Roman Catholic parish (for almost 10 years),
which kept me in constant weekly connection with the ins and outs of the Liturgy.
(which I know doesn't "count" for all of you non liturgical types. )

Anyhow, once I experienced prolonged epiphany/ HEIGHTened Reality,
all of that "study" amounted to nothing.
The direct experience of gOd renders it all ... well... meh. eh.
Still I love the Kingdom Teachings, as they express exactly what I have seen.
(in gospel "terms"/terminology)

I do occasionally enjoy browsing parables and such again with New Eyes as well.

Leaving the Roman Catholic Faith is not the same as rejecting historic Biblical Christianity. I believe the Protestant Reformation was a work of God to recover the biblical gospel of God's grace.

 

[blackout]

Leaving the Roman Catholic Faith is not the same as rejecting historic Biblical Christianity. I believe the Protestant Reformation was a work of God to recover the biblical gospel of God's grace.

You know ... you're a real a** CP. (IMO)

I was then an out of church (building) NON roman catholic christian
for about 3 years. AS IF I NEED TO EXPLAIN ANYTHING TO YOU. :areyoucra

Eventually I got so FREIKIN' SICK of people arrogantly telling me my
"non church (building)" gOd IN-SPIRED christianity was NOT christianity...
I said fine. Who the hell needs this lousy label anyway.

You and your kind ALWAYS KNOW EVERYTHING, don't you.

And I'm not mad or upset BTW.

Just seem to like caps for emphasis today.