I think of myself is a political and theological centerist overall which goes back on the liberal acceptance idea but not as much the conservative beliefs, because that can vary considerably by church. I really don't know what I am anymore but I try to bridge the gap between the more conservative and liberal types. Needless to say that is harder tahn it sounds.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
How can you be a moderate politically or theologically without being wishy-washy? For instance, like you can't make up your mind? For instance, I hold steadfast to the beliefs that Jesus was resurrected in body, was born of a virgin, and was the son of God. However, I don't believe when the Bible says that a wife is to be submissive to her husband does that mean she is subordinate, a doormat, or has to submit to the will of all men on the planet. Does this equal wishy-washy?
__________________ Dana (possessed by Zuul): Do you want this body?
I guess in my case I'd say I'm "moderate" in that I regard Scripture as inerrant and authoritative, but I am not wedded to "traditions" or traditional translations and interpretations, nor to any particular theological "system."
__________________ "I reject your reality and substitute my own." -- Mythbuster Adam Savage
"Logic: The art of being wrong with confidence." -- ComputerGear T-Shirt
"Well THAT was a slap and a tickle!" -- William the Bloody
How can you be a moderate politically or theologically without being wishy-washy? For instance, like you can't make up your mind? For instance, I hold steadfast to the beliefs that Jesus was resurrected in body, was born of a virgin, and was the son of God. However, I don't believe when the Bible says that a wife is to be submissive to her husband does that mean she is subordinate, a doormat, or has to submit to the will of all men on the planet. Does this equal wishy-washy?
No. "Wishy-washy" means that you don't have any beliefs that you hold firmly; your mind is easily changed. If you have some firm "left" views and some firm "right" views, you would be moderate and/or eclectic (for which Izzy is sort of the Poster Girl), but not wishy-washy.
__________________ "I reject your reality and substitute my own." -- Mythbuster Adam Savage
"Logic: The art of being wrong with confidence." -- ComputerGear T-Shirt
"Well THAT was a slap and a tickle!" -- William the Bloody
How can you be a moderate politically or theologically without being wishy-washy? For instance, like you can't make up your mind?
That's a common misconception about moderates, be it theological or political.
It doesn't have to mean being "in the middle" on all the issues. I am quite conservative about some things and quite liberal on others. But I don't believe one should "pick a team" -- be it conservative or liberal -- and automatically take their side. Politically, for example, I find the "groupthink" mentality -- pick a side and always stay with it -- as a poor and unappetizing substitute for independent thought.
It is more work this way; some of us can't go to the ballot box and just automatically punch the name next to the "D" or the "R".
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Please pray for rain in Central and South Texas... To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Also, there is such a thing as being in the 'radical middle' - in other words, positions that seem to fall halfway between left and right (or held by neither left or right) and are still held firmly. Generally speaking, this trend in U.S politics tends to reflect old-style populism (however, because the U.S. political landscape is so rigidly two-party, this means those that support it generally tend to still be Democrat or Republican, just that they lean strongly toward the center). The most visible candidate closest to this in the last election was probably Edwards, as he made direct reference to populism and Teddy Roosevelt's trust-busting initiatives, but we all know how that turned out. It also includes viewpoints that switch sides from left to right and back with a certain level of frequency - fair/flat tax propositions tend to do this, for instance. I do particularly like a quote attributed to Jefferson, to the effect of being in the middle is preferable because then you aren't in the gutters.
'Centrism' really is a better term when talking of that sort of thing. 'Moderate' tends to evoke a toned-down demeanor, and the way the modern church culture has distorted what people are supposed to perceive as proper faith into one highly-charged emotional high, being toned-down or solemn or so on starts looking flimsy or lukewarm. 'Centrist' doesn't, but it's a much more politically-oriented term.
I see myself as traditional, post-modern, and centrist, if I had to really come up with a description. Namely this is because while growing up we were raised with light quasi-fundamentalist beliefs, with a couple extreme examples which swung way to that side of the scale, and as I got older and looked more at church history, I 'liberaled up', when compared to what we were raised believing. However, the beliefs I came to are still very firmly traditional. But due to all that I see the term 'conservative' more or less affixed to the extremely reactionary side, and thus traditionality looks pretty moderate. Thinking seriously about it, which would people be more likely to label as 'conservative' - evangelical churches of varying sorts, or the Catholic Church or Orthodox Church? It depends on how you define the term 'conservative' in the first place, or what it connotes in your mind.
The post-modern aspect has less to do with throwing away tradition and more to do with how to broach the subject of correcting the problems associated with the fruit of modernism. In addition to being a gross overreaction to modernism, IMO, Fundamentalism created numerous problems in both relating to the people being witnessed to, and within the people raised in that system who became disillusioned with it all. It was far more damaging than helpful, as far as I'm concerned. So trying to move beyond that and find meaning in what one believes in relation to today's world is pretty well-described as 'post-modern' (or 'Emergent' if you will).
I already described centrism, so there's no need to repeat that.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Is the pain of not knowing, worth the price of saying nothing?
Moderate Christians prefer to show their faith by example and to not impose that faith on others by legal means.
Hm: I wonder if Christ would say his death was a "legal means" (substitution) or "example" (moral example)? In which case would he say he was "moderate"?
__________________ To be reprobate is to be left in sin, not pushed or forced to sin. R. C. Sproul.
Wasn't Jesus quite radical for his time though? I mean going up to people telling them they can't just stone women "who without sin cast the first stone", along with allowing Mary and Martha to sit at his feet and listen, say that "one must be like a child before entering the kingdom of heaven", stuff like that? Or even saying "love thy neighbor"? Considering how people used to treat each other (women, children, neighbors especially)?
__________________ Dana (possessed by Zuul): Do you want this body?
Hm: I wonder if Christ would say his death was a "legal means" (substitution) or "example" (moral example)? In which case would he say he was "moderate"?
John 8 - Christ is confronted by the Pharisees who bring to him an adulteress, saying "Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
How does He respond? "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."
He wasn't legalistic ('she needs to be stoned'), nor does he deny that she sinned ('but she loves him - love makes it okay'). Instead, He convicted the accusers, deals with her kindly - "Neither do I condemn thee:" but also states "go, and sin no more." To me, that is "moderate Jesus" - shows love and compassion, doesn't deny the sin, but is not legalistic in carrying out punishment according to the Law.
Jesus's death satisfied a legal requirement so to speak in order to cleanse from sin - but still, it was God Himself providing the sacrifice because of His great love and our salvation is due to His grace being given to us.
Linear Mode
