I'm a Christian

[hijklmnop]

"The fact is, none of us - not a one - over there, lived up to our Christian faith. That is fact."

Well, that's your opinion. Feel free to speak for yourself but please don't speak for me. If I felt like I had done something wrong I would have apologized. I have done so in the past.

"Anyway, here is a man who is struggling with his faith, WE have ALL been stumbling blocks to him in that struggle, and not one here has shown ANY compassion to a man struggling. Would you all prefer that he leave his faith because of you (plural, in case any English majors are reading)?"

Again with the English major thing?

Here's what I think: things like your statement quoted above make it seem like you are looking for counsel/help/encouragement. Apostolic says he doesn't want counsel, he just wants discussion. So I'll just say that whatever you guys want, I do not feel like it is reasonable to throw A34's faith or loss thereof in the face of people on a message board. If one is looking to others to restore, maintain, or create their faith in God then they are building thir house on the sand, so to speak. People are fallible and they disappoint. God is not and does not. Fix your eyes upon Him and look to Him to be everything that people cannot.

I am sorry apostolic that you are struggling with your faith. But I can't fix that for you. God can. I hope you feel more peace soon.

 

[mkgal1]

The issues of this thread has been going on for a long time. The other thread was just enough to demonstrate to him that he has every reason in the world to feel the way he does.


The manifesto is not there to show anyone that they are not a good enough Christian. It is there to show what an Evangelical Christian is, in an age where the term is often misused. Assumptions about what it is don't suit anyone until they have checked it out to make sure their assumptions are correct - one of the issues in the other thread.

It seems that A34 is saying one thing....and you (VG) are saying another. In his OP, he said his faith is unshakable. You are saying he's having a crisis of faith.

The purpose for the manifesto also seems to be different, according to him:

Ask - do I live up to these standards and share them with the world around me?

As for me, Evangelicals are starting to make me take a real look at myself and my faith. For that, I want to thank you. Perhaps in a way that was not intended by some of you, but it's a look inside and a faith journey nonetheless.

It would be closer to say that some of those who identify as 'Evangelical' at times don't live up to evangelical values.

I suppose what I'm trying to get at with the whole thread, and posting the Evangelical Manifesto, comes back to the reasons that the 'more than bothered' thread was asked to be closed. I read through the whole thing and it seems that as much as people try to bow out, it's not possible. Paul warns us in scripture about these types of back-biting behaviors in Galatians, even going so far as to say that those who do such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

 

[mkgal1]

But there was no respect there, assumptions were made, accusations were made, legalism over the letter of the English language law was more important than the spirit of communication, and even when I made serious attempts to lighten things up, to repair the relationship, to politely bow out of the conversation, and own up to and take responsibility for my own actions and words, even more people ganged up and would not let it go.

Isn't this, in itself, an accusation and not letting it go?

 

[ImaginaryDay]

It seems that A34 is saying one thing....and you (VG) are saying another. In his OP, he said his faith is unshakable. You are saying he's having a crisis of faith.

Questioning what I believe has no bearing on my Christianity. That won't change.

The purpose for the manifesto also seems to be different, according to him:

Not really. The purpose for it is exactly what the authors intended. To bring Evangelicals back to some semblance of what they believe Evangelical Christians should look like and act. And I believe that it's needed. Right now, Evangelical Christianity is turning into fodder for jokes because collectively there seems to be no unity - nothing that defines them. And (AS AN EXAMPLE) the thread that got closed only confirms (for me) that conversation with a view toward Christ may not be first in mind for some. So the quotes you listed are addressing the same thing in different ways:

Ask - do I live up to these standards and share them with the world around me?

So - why not ask? I do, and most Christians I know do the same. Taking a look inside ourselves isn't popular, but it's needed. The reason some of us don't is because it messes with our world-view. And that's uncomfortable.

As for me, Evangelicals are starting to make me take a real look at myself and my faith. For that, I want to thank you. Perhaps in a way that was not intended by some of you, but it's a look inside and a faith journey nonetheless.

This has been going on for long before I ever came to CF. It's a blanket statement. I know that we have lurkers here and we have those who post every day. Essentially, this has been going on since I left the Pentecostal church about three years ago. But for some to say that one thread started this whole exchange would be off. Many exchanges brought this one on. And I'd just seen and heard enough. I'm typically a quiet guy, to a point.

It would be closer to say that some of those who identify as 'Evangelical' at times don't live up to evangelical values.

I think I've addressed this a number of times in this post and others.

I suppose what I'm trying to get at with the whole thread, and posting the Evangelical Manifesto, comes back to the reasons that the 'more than bothered' thread was asked to be closed. I read through the whole thing and it seems that as much as people try to bow out, it's not possible. Paul warns us in scripture about these types of back-biting behaviors in Galatians, even going so far as to say that those who do such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

If we take Paul's statement as true, why does it continue to happen, and why would we not want to take advantage of something where we can all improve ourselves? It seems that we don't even read the rules of conduct for the site, let alone something that can strengthen us in our faith.

 

[mkgal1]

If we take Paul's statement as true, why does it continue to happen, and why would we not want to take advantage of something where we can all improve ourselves? It seems that we don't even read the rules of conduct for the site, let alone something that can strengthen us in our faith.

Well....generally, one word.....sin. The Bible does tell us (and I believe that was *also* penned by Paul to the church @ Colossians), though, to "make allowance for other's faults (as we aren't perfect either)." I believe it's not the clashes themselves that are the problem......but how they're handled afterwards that matters most.

Specifically (in answer to your question), I believe VG already answered that here:

As for me, I ask A34 to forgive me. I know that I have messed up recently, and I am not proud of myself. I apologize to him and to any others reading on these forums if I have caused anyone to stumble because of my own lack of self-control in my reactions to my triggers. I should have bowed out of the conversation when my conscience said it was getting hot, but I did not listen. I know that my actions have damaged my credibility as a Christian, and I pray that God would have mercy on me and restore those who have been adversely affected by my actions. The Word says to confess your sins one to another so that you may be healed....and being the broken person that I am, I confess as a prerequisite to his healing.

 

[ImaginaryDay]

Well....generally, one word.....sin. The Bible does tell us (and I believe that was *also* penned by Paul to the church @ Colossians), though, to "make allowance for other's faults (as we aren't perfect either)."

I would agree. And if sinful attitudes and behavior are to the point that we can't control ourselves after a time, then as Christians we need to do some work on ourselves to find out what the problem is. As I said, it's painful, but necessary.

 

[mkgal1]

I would agree. And if sinful attitudes and behavior are to the point that we can't control ourselves after a time, then as Christians we need to do some work on ourselves to find out what the problem is. As I said, it's painful, but necessary.

I wholeheartedly agree.

 

[ValleyGal]

I would agree. And if sinful attitudes and behavior are to the point that we can't control ourselves after a time, then as Christians we need to do some work on ourselves to find out what the problem is. As I said, it's painful, but necessary.

And rare.

 

[mkgal1]

And rare.

I'm not sure about that. I've seen lots of people that are willing to do that. We're all a combination of wheat and tares.

 

[ValleyGal]

Personally, I find way too many in denial and not enough willing to do the hard work. I facilitate a healing group - but it is a 12-step group that is very hard work and requires a long, painful look inside - no more blame, rationalization, justification, minimizing, or any other excuse for behaviour. The first few sessions are fairly light, kind of like listening to a sermon. But then the real work starts happening and people drop out like crazy. [Most] people [typically] do not like admitting to themselves, let alone to others, that they have done harm, hurt people, been a stumbling block, or whatever other defects they have. It's why [most] people rarely say "I'm sorry I hurt you (or whatever other specific thing they have done to harm another person)" and actually mean it.

People have too much pride. It gets in the way of empathy, in the way of building intimate friendships and relationships, in the way of healthy communication, in the way of building trust and a "safe" place for people. It makes forgiveness hard and reconciliation impossible. And it ultimately stifles unity in the body of believers. But ignorance is bliss, and it's easier to stay in the bliss than it is to own up to how we treat others. The truth is too painful.

 

[mkgal1]

Personally, I find way too many in denial and not enough willing to do the hard work. I facilitate a healing group - but it is a 12-step group that is very hard work and requires a long, painful look inside - no more blame, rationalization, justification, minimizing, or any other excuse for behaviour. The first few sessions are fairly light, kind of like listening to a sermon. But then the real work starts happening and people drop out like crazy. [Most] people [typically] do not like admitting to themselves, let alone to others, that they have done harm, hurt people, been a stumbling block, or whatever other defects they have. It's why [most] people rarely say "I'm sorry I hurt you (or whatever other specific thing they have done to harm another person)" and actually mean it.

People have too much pride. It gets in the way of empathy, in the way of building intimate friendships and relationships, in the way of healthy communication, in the way of building trust and a "safe" place for people. It makes forgiveness hard and reconciliation impossible. And it ultimately stifles unity in the body of believers. But ignorance is bliss, and it's easier to stay in the bliss than it is to own up to how we treat others. The truth is too painful.

VG....did you not admit to losing self-control and being "triggered"?

ITA with you in your second paragraph. That's well said.

 

[ValleyGal]

I certainly did. I have no illusions about my own involvement in the discussion, and I have owned them. So...what are you trying to say here? I've done what I need to do as far as it depends on me and I'd appreciate if you would keep that other stuff off A34's thread. Thank you.

 

[mkgal1]

I certainly did. I have no illusions about my own involvement in the discussion, and I have owned them. So...what are you trying to say here? I've done what I need to do as far as it depends on me and I'd appreciate if you would keep that other stuff off A34's thread. Thank you.

Since you and A34 seem to be the only ones that know what the topic at hand is......I'm going to try to refrain from butting in.

 

[ValleyGal]

No one said you are butting in. This is a public forum. I'm just saying that we really need to not bring in the old stuff from a completely different topic/thread/issue into this one. I've owned my stuff. Isn't that enough? Why does it need to be brought up again and again and again...no matter how many times I've owned it. I'm done with the discussion and moving on to this one....I'd appreciate if you could do the same.

 

[mkgal1]

No one said you are butting in. This is a public forum. I'm just saying that we really need to not bring in the old stuff from a completely different topic/thread/issue into this one. I've owned my stuff. Isn't that enough? Why does it need to be brought up again and again and again...no matter how many times I've owned it. I'm done with the discussion and moving on to this one....I'd appreciate if you could do the same.

Your husband already has......several times. He's even posted that this thread *does* have to do with the other thread. That's why I'm saying I'll leave you two to discuss it. I'm not going to get caught in the middle.

 

[ValleyGal]

We've already discussed it. But that does not mean I can't take part here. You can address what I say without constant referring to to the specifics of that thread. That thread was such a small part of what he is trying to talk about...like the straw that broke the camel's back. But it is the theme that is pervasive through the whole BoC, and it is never really dealt with in a healthy way, and it gives people a poor example of our faith. Discuss away, but please, no more finger pointing. It is not edifying anyone, especially since I have done all I could do as far as it depends on me. The rest is up to the others who were involved.

 

[mkgal1]

We've already discussed it. But that does not mean I can't take part here. You can address what I say without constant referring to to the specifics of that thread. That thread was such a small part of what he is trying to talk about...like the straw that broke the camel's back. But it is the theme that is pervasive through the whole BoC, and it is never really dealt with in a healthy way, and it gives people a poor example of our faith. Discuss away, but please, no more finger pointing. It is not edifying anyone, especially since I have done all I could do as far as it depends on me. The rest is up to the others who were involved.

Never? It's never dealt with in a healthy way? I disagree. I have seen healthy confrontations that have led to a stronger.....more faithful and trusting relationship afterwards.

I wasn't "finger pointing" just trying to get a grasp on reality.

I just had to say that.

 

[ValleyGal]

I think you missed my point by placing emphasis on the wrong word. I mean it's never really dealt with in a healthy way. Maybe on a personal and intimate level with some people it might be, if both sides are fortunate enough to be self-reflective, honest, open to vulnerability with each other, and willing to admit how they contributed to the issue. But I find that quite rare. But aside from that, on a more global level as in BoC, it's not really dealt with in a healthy way. The BoC is in denial for the most part, not recognizing how we contribute to the world's lousy perception of us as a body of believers.

The grasp on reality...reality is that I have done my part in owning up to it...the rest is up to everyone else and I have nothing further to say about it aside from I'd appreciate it not being brought back up time after time. There are numerous other examples you can use besides something as raw as this.

 

[seeingeyes]

Maybe someone should start a thread for the purpose of discussing the infamous 'other' thread? Oh, maybe I'll bite that bullet.

I Do:
Believe everything that the Bible stands for and confirm that Nicene creed. Evangelicals (which, for my purposes includes everyone who does not identify as Catholic, Protestant, EO, Anglican/Episcopalian, or Lutheran from your faith icon) would do well to read the following and ask - is this me?

http://www.anevangelicalmanifesto.com/docs/Evangelical_Manifesto.pdf

Your definition (in bold) seems to disagree with the Manifesto's definition:

"We are members of many different churches and denominations, mainline as well as independent, and our Evangelical commitment provides a core of unity that holds together a wide range of diversity."

"We do not claim that the Evangelical principle —to define our faith and our life by the Good News of Jesus — is unique to us."

I'm not trying to nitpick you, but this manifesto seems to lean more moderate than most of the Evangelicals I know (and I know quite a few, I go to an Evangelical non-denominational church), so I'm doubting how representative this manifesto is to Evangelicalism.

It seems more like it's attempting to reclaim a term that has moved on to a new meaning (or several new meanings). I mean, no one could make a historically valid argument for Evangelicalism appearing before the 1730's, so the manifesto's claim that the Reformers were Evangelicals clearly demonstrates that the authors are looking to redefine the term rather than recover its etymology.

Just my two cents.

Ask - do I live up to these standards and share them with the world around me?

As for me, Evangelicals are starting to make me take a real look at myself and my faith. For that, I want to thank you. Perhaps in a way that was not intended by some of you, but it's a look inside and a faith journey nonetheless.

But what I do know is that I am a Christian and that is unshaken.

I'm not clear on who the Evangelicals are who "helped" you to look at your faith. They know who they are, I suppose? I can't tell if that includes me or not. (I never refer to myself as an Evangelical, but I do fit your definition of the word. But I do try not to assume that everything is all about me. )

At any rate, I do believe that if we aren't acting out our faith then we are simply creatures of fear. Ain't no Christ in that.

God bless

 

[ImaginaryDay]

Maybe someone should start a thread for the purpose of discussing the infamous 'other' thread? Oh, maybe I'll bite that bullet.

Not sure how 'hot button' that still is, but feel free . I shall stay a long ways away...

Your definition (in bold) seems to disagree with the Manifesto's definition:

"We are members of many different churches and denominations, mainline as well as independent, and our Evangelical commitment provides a core of unity that holds together a wide range of diversity."

"We do not claim that the Evangelical principle —to define our faith and our life by the Good News of Jesus — is unique to us."

I'm not trying to nitpick you, but this manifesto seems to lean more moderate than most of the Evangelicals I know (and I know quite a few, I go to an Evangelical non-denominational church), so I'm doubting how representative this manifesto is to Evangelicalism.

It seems to me that today most Evangelicals are a bit more moderate, but the manifesto language covers those of all stripes.

As for my making the exceptions that I did (what you noted in bold) many of them, especially if the GT forum, seem to distance themselves from what is considered 'Evangelical' Christianity, so that's the reason I did not count them as Evangelical. However, some of them may choose to self-identify as Evangelical, even if their stated faith group might be Catholic, Orthodox, or otherwise.

It seems more like it's attempting to reclaim a term that has moved on to a new meaning (or several new meanings). I mean, no one could make a historically valid argument for Evangelicalism appearing before the 1730's, so the manifesto's claim that the Reformers were Evangelicals clearly demonstrates that the authors are looking to redefine the term rather than recover its etymology.

I would (for now) agree with you here. And that's part of the reason for my interest right now in Church history, examining the Reformers, what they did, what they believed, and how it might/might not have been in line with classical Christianity. I just sense it's going to be a long journey/study for me.

I'm not clear on who the Evangelicals are who "helped" you to look at your faith. They know who they are, I suppose? I can't tell if that includes me or not. (I never refer to myself as an Evangelical, but I do fit your definition of the word. But I do try not to assume that everything is all about me. )

Most know. And it's not isolated to CF either. I suppose it all comes down to authenticity, how someone lives out their faith. It does me no good to sit in a pew on Sunday, worship to the latest Contemporary Christian whatever, hear the message, discuss it, say "that really applies", then promptly forget what I've heard, treating others with spite or at the least with an attitude that does not attract them to the Christian life.

At any rate, I do believe that if we aren't acting out our faith then we are simply creatures of fear. Ain't no Christ in that.

I wholeheartedly agree.

God bless

Same to you