Classifying Yourself

[Willtor]

Here's another TE/YEC breakdown poll. Of course, we can't hope to be scientific about it, but I'd rather like to see how we OT peeps classify ourselves.

If you choose Other please be specific.

 

[LoG]

Could you define YEC-OEC? Seems to me a bit of an oxymoron.

 

[Willtor]

YEC-OEC is basically non-TE. I grouped YEC and OEC together, just as I grouped Conservative and Fundamentalist together. They're not the same thing, and I know they're not the same thing, but I had to accept some relaxed constraints in order to get the poll to fit.

 

[jereth]

I chose "TE - conservative/fundamentalist" because I consider myself a conservative Christian (but not a fundamentalist). Ideally, these would have been separate options.

To explain:
Conservative views = Infallibility of scripture, literal bodily resurrection, substitutionary atonement, predestination, anti-abortion, marriage only between M and F, no sex outside marriage, male leadership of church, male leadership of family, etc.

Non-fundamentalist views = acceptance of critical scholarship, non-historicist reading of prophecy, amilennialism, non-literalist reading of Genesis, anti-Zionism etc.

 

[Scholar in training]

I'm loathe to vote for the first choice. I view myself as conservative, but I'm theologically closer to Eastern Orthodoxy than Protestantism. I'm not at all a fundamentalist.

 

[Willtor]

Jereth:

Yeah, sorry about that. Ideally, CF would support multiple dimensions for its polls.

Preferably with the customization of gnuplot.

But the polls were really intended for fellowship threads. "Which baseball team do you like in the playoffs?" They really aren't designed to do what we're trying to do with them, even in our proto-scientific endeavors.

 

[charityagape]

Yes, polls are hard to do for any serious discussion, they can't be taylor made. But this looks like a very interesting one.

 

[jereth]

Jereth:

Yeah, sorry about that. Ideally, CF would support multiple dimensions for its polls.

Preferably with the customization of gnuplot.

But the polls were really intended for fellowship threads. "Which baseball team do you like in the playoffs?" They really aren't designed to do what we're trying to do with them, even in our proto-scientific endeavors.

It's ok so long as we get to explain our choices in a follow-up post!

 

[Pats]

Thank you, Wiltor, for posting a more open Poll.

It seemed impossible to vote in Shernren's or Vossoler's polls unless you consider yourself a TE or a YEC.

I am not sure what little box I belong in, but I know I don't belong in any of them right now.

When I first joined this forum, I was a devote YEC because I believed that only that view was consistant with scripture. It was what I was raised to believe and I had not learned much about other theologies.

Now, I do not feel some of what the YECs say is plausible or correct. Neither do I feel a desperate need to join up with a particular group.

I summed up what I believe in another thread:

I don't think the a debate such as the YEC view vs. the TE view is worth anyone's salvation. Meaning, if a person has accepted modern science as it is taught in the main stream and finds too much evidence against the YEC view to ever accept it, this should not be a hinderance to their belief in Christ, salvation, or relationship with God when there are other sound theologies that might make sense to them.

My ideas along these lines right now are just thoughts I've recently begun to have, so, please take them as such. I am not a very scientific person neither am I a Bible shcollar.

I believe God is an awesome, indefinable God that exists outside of time and science as we know them here on Earth.

I believe that God created the heavens and the earth and all that dwells therein.

I do not think the Bible was ever meant to be a science book nor do I think biology class is a place for religion.

If I were going to do something like for example, build a computer and then tell my 5 year old child about how I did it, I certainly wouldn't go into minute and intracate detail.

I think there are some mysteries that science has not resolved and will not resolve regarding our origins because it's not in the nature of science to do so. Likewise, it's not in the nature of the Bible to explain everything God has done and will do. The Bible just tells us about some of those acts.

I think, somehow, in ways we can hardly fathom, God made everything. Beyond that, the details of how He executed that task are not relavant to my faith.

Many of you have contacted me in private, and some commented in public, with your compliments on that post, thank you.

It is equally as difficult for me to say wether I am a conservative, fundamentalist, or liberal. I am not sure exactly what the differance is between a fundamentalist and a conservative.

Some of my religious views lean more toward liberal, probably, but more of them are conservative. Same with my political views, except that I do not believe in legislating my religious views. I believe in keeping church and state very seperate. I think that's important to our religious freedoms. Some say voting that homosexual marriage should be legal is liberal. But, I vote against abortion because that goes beyond religion down to a belief that it is killing humans. To me, this isn't simply a religious issue.

So, I can't specificly identify with particular groups well.

 

[RenHoek]

Yec Conservative. Seems to me there is great value in scripture to adhering to a disciplined lifestyle built around a “conservative” framework.

I believe God said what He meant literally through scripture and that “every word” is God breathed. I believe that a God capable of speaking a universe into being is more than capable of articulating and preserving, through time, a consistent word for those who love Him.

I believe that America has been blessed in the past for the conservative stances that built the nation and if they are slackened too much, (homosexual marriage, abortion being legalized, abandonment of Israel), we will go the way of OT Israel when they were disobedient.

That said, I do not think the federal government should be involved in much of this. States should be given the authority to legislate these and most other issues, this way we are not all bound to the same choices where none get as they please. In this respect the wrong side won the civil war.

I believe in kicking the snot out of terrorists in their own sandbox, regardless of why we went there. A flexed muscle goes a long way to make people think twice.

That should be enough to fan some flames. Enjoy your new piñata.

 

[Melethiel]

I chose TE - Conservative/Fundamentalist, but I'm really quite loath to take on the title of "Fundamentalist". I consider myself more of a "Traditionalist," having a conservative Lutheran/somewhat EO theological leaning.

 

[Willtor]

Yec Conservative. Seems to me there is great value in scripture to adhering to a disciplined lifestyle built around a “conservative” framework.

I believe God said what He meant literally through scripture and that “every word” is God breathed. I believe that a God capable of speaking a universe into being is more than capable of articulating and preserving, through time, a consistent word for those who love Him.

What do you make of TEs who believe ``every word'' of Scripture? I believe every word. But I don't interpret it the same way as you do. How do we decide between our interpretations? Can this be done?

I believe that America has been blessed in the past for the conservative stances that built the nation and if they are slackened too much, (homosexual marriage, abortion being legalized, abandonment of Israel), we will go the way of OT Israel when they were disobedient.

That said, I do not think the federal government should be involved in much of this. States should be given the authority to legislate these and most other issues, this way we are not all bound to the same choices where none get as they please. In this respect the wrong side won the civil war.

There are different views of what the civil war was about in different parts of the country. However, I was hoping the discussion would steer more towards the relation between general theology and origins theology.

I believe in kicking the snot out of terrorists in their own sandbox, regardless of why we went there. A flexed muscle goes a long way to make people think twice.

That should be enough to fan some flames. Enjoy your new piñata.

There are people who call that "sandbox" home. If we're going to fight terrorists there, the least we can do is show some deference.

 

[Pats]

I believe in kicking the snot out of terrorists in their own sandbox, regardless of why we went there. A flexed muscle goes a long way to make people think twice.

This kind of talk tells me nothing about the issue, or how it relates to the OP here. More or less, it only reflects on you.

While it is agreeable that a terrorist deserves to be punished for what he has done, the Muslim mothers and fathers trying to raise families do not. They don't deserve to be killed any more than our innocent civillians did during the 9/11 attacks.

I think you have demonstrated in this post, how to not answer the OP.

 

[RenHoek]

What do you make of TEs who believe ``every word'' of Scripture? I believe every word. But I don't interpret it the same way as you do. How do we decide between our interpretations? Can this be done?

Not according to our previous discussions. Perhaps I should have said at face value or in simplest/literal terms. We have already decided between the two, you have yours and I have mine, and together we’ll be fine. It takes dif’rent strokes it takes dif…..sorry caught in a theme song to a bad sitcom.

There are different views of what the civil war was about in different parts of the country. However, I was hoping the discussion would steer more towards the relation between general theology and origins theology.
There are people who call that "sandbox" home. If we're going to fight terrorists there, the least we can do is show some deference.

Sorry, sometimes I get caught in a rant and it just doesn’t stop. Used to defending the other conservative stance too.

 

[Willtor]

Not according to our previous discussions. Perhaps I should have said at face value or in simplest/literal terms. We have already decided between the two, you have yours and I have mine, and together we’ll be fine. It takes dif’rent strokes it takes dif…..sorry caught in a theme song to a bad sitcom.

You know that this makes a substantial difference. In fact, it is a crucial difference. Now, it is no longer a question of whether we accept the Genesis account as true, but how it is intended.

Sorry, sometimes I get caught in a rant and it just doesn’t stop. Used to defending the other conservative stance too.

Okay, but keep in mind these are human beings we're talking about. It's one thing to defend an action or political view; It's another to belittle a group of people by calling their home a sandbox. They are the hosts to our troops. Last I checked, we weren't welcome guests. We might change that by showing some civility and deference.

 

[RenHoek]

You know that this makes a substantial difference. In fact, it is a crucial difference. Now, it is no longer a question of whether we accept the Genesis account as true, but how it is intended.

Agreed. I do have more respect for your position, but I still must respectfully disagree with it.

Okay, but keep in mind these are human beings we're talking about. It's one thing to defend an action or political view; It's another to belittle a group of people by calling their home a sandbox. They are the hosts to our troops. Last I checked, we weren't welcome guests. We might change that by showing some civility and deference.

I tend to look toward the Old Testament for my views on how to effectively wage war, so we are better off not getting into this in this thread. My bad for bringing it up. Moo.

 

[chaoschristian]

I voted 'OTHER' and here is why:

Well, without a doubt I'm TE, and while that in and of itself is enough to get me labeled as a liberal, the poll isn't asking how I think other people view me, but how I view me.

With that regard, I shun labels such as liberal and conservative because they are too relative. Modern conservatives are actually very liberal, in that they seek great change. This necessitates new labels like neo-conservative to get across the idea that here we have a group of so called 'conservatives' who don't really fit the accepted conservative norm.

I'm conservative in the sense that I want to preserve the core orthodoxy of the church, and preserve the knowledge of the ancient traditions with regards to that core orthodoxy.

I'm very liberal in that I view a lot of the culture that has attached itself to the church over the centuries as completely expendable, and I seek to promote the desire for cultural change within the church. Its that whole wineskin thing.

 

[Willtor]

I shun labels, too, and I don't like this "spectrum" view of the Church. I come from a "conservative" background, and a lot of the views I hold wouldn't be accepted by various Churches I've attended because the views are "too liberal." Of course, they're not liberal.

I posted "moderate" anyway because I couldn't come up with a meaningful way to classify myself given the way the Church has decided to divide. Vossler, I think, was concerned that TEs were mostly liberal, and given the paradigm I can only view myself as moderate. My only concern is that people typically equate "moderate" with "nominal" which is not at all accurate.

 

[chaoschristian]

My only concern is that people typically equate "moderate" with "nominal" which is not at all accurate.

There is no middle ground on a bifurcation. The ends always polarize the center. Bifurcations are conceptually polarizing and the norm of using these to identify value structures seriously misinforms our understanding of the world around us.

 

[Willtor]

There is no middle ground on a bifurcation. The ends always polarize the center. Bifurcations are conceptually polarizing and the norm of using these to identify value structures seriously misinforms our understanding of the world around us.

Here's the biggie: Is this polarization related to politics? We've already had one post that confused the two. Does one stem from the other, or do they have a third, common cause? (common ancestry, anyone?)