Liberal Christians - What Do You Mean?

what on earth are you talking about? your view on the bible is the correct one and mine is wrong because you said so? you are not god.

What I find interesting is some will staunchly deny the literal interpretation of scripture, but hold fast to the communion being the actual body and blood of Christ.

Tree of Life said:

I'm constantly surprised to see posters on here who are identified as some form of Christian and yet deny basic biblical doctrines and deny the truth of the Scriptures.

Click to expand...

Could the problem actually be more along the lines of :

I'm constantly surprised to see posters on here who are identified as some form of Christian and yet deny basic biblical doctrines and deny the truth of the Scriptures AS I UNDERSTAND THEM. (emph. and words added to original post)

Click to expand...

?

If you identify as a Christian and you know that you're "to the left" - you deny Biblical inerrancy, you deny classic orthodox doctrines, etc... - what do you mean when you say: "I'm a Christian"? Why do you identify as a Christian if you don't believe that the Bible is the word of God? (emph. added)

Click to expand...

Do you think it might be because "the Word of God" isn't actually the book about Jesus but is in reality Jesus Himself? And again, maybe the problem isn't really "denying" all those things but more about simply not believing your understanding of them to be the only correct way to believe?
tulc(just a thought)

Tree of Life said:

Well...

My view on the Bible is that it is the word of God. For this reason, I call myself a Christian.

If you call yourself a Christian but you do not believe the Bible is God's word, then what do you mean by "Christian"?

Click to expand...

my view is also that the bible is the word of god, for that reason i also call myself a christian. so what do you mean with that i am not a christian?

rjs330 said:

What I find interesting is some will staunchly deny the literal interpretation of scripture, but hold fast to the communion being the actual body and blood of Christ.

Click to expand...

What I find interesting is that a lot of people don't understand what literature is, and that sometimes literature is literal and sometimes not, and that they don't trust the Apostles and ECF's to have gotten it right.

rjs330 said:

What I find interesting is some will staunchly deny the literal interpretation of scripture, but hold fast to the communion being the actual body and blood of Christ.

Click to expand...

Yes, but it can also be said that it is interesting that fundamentalists, etc. will staunchly affirm a literal interpretation of scripture but insist that when Jesus took bread, showed it to his disciples, and said "This is my body"...he didn't mean that literally, you know, but he was only using a figure of speech or an analogy.

Tree of Life said:

I'm constantly surprised to see posters on here who are identified as some form of Christian and yet deny basic biblical doctrines and deny the truth of the Scriptures.

If you identify as a Christian and you know that you're "to the left" - you deny Biblical inerrancy, you deny classic orthodox doctrines, etc... - what do you mean when you say: "I'm a Christian"? Why do you identify as a Christian if you don't believe that the Bible is the word of God?

Click to expand...

I don't believe that the Bible is the word of God. That's Jesus. AS for words of God, I do believe if we study the Bible we can learn what God intends for us. But the Bible was never meant to be treated as a dictation from God. And through my study of the Bible, I find too many things that seem to contradict each other. I rather believe those contradictions are the results of earnest but flawed people best trying to understood what God was telling them then they being intentional.

Tree of Life said:

I'm constantly surprised to see posters on here who are identified as some form of Christian and yet deny basic biblical doctrines and deny the truth of the Scriptures.

If you identify as a Christian and you know that you're "to the left" - you deny Biblical inerrancy, you deny classic orthodox doctrines, etc... - what do you mean when you say: "I'm a Christian"? Why do you identify as a Christian if you don't believe that the Bible is the word of God?

Click to expand...

I certainly dont believe in the literal translation. To do that i would have to say science knows nothing whilst simultaneously posting it through my computer onto the internet whilst not recognising the irony in that.

I dont believe in the literal translations where it is exposed to contradictions - eg Thou shalt not kill - followed by countless examples of commissioning genocides and the killing of innocent women and children.

I dont hold to literal translations when I know that Mosaic laws are not accepted within our society or are simply contradicted in other parts of the bible.

I dont hold to translations that require submission of women.

lastly you seem to be saying if your christian you cannot be leftward politically. Thats an odd position - Id have thought Jesus was a great leftward thinker in a sea of conservatism.

Arcangl86 said:

I don't believe that the Bible is the word of God. That's Jesus.

Click to expand...

Both are described as the word of God in different places in scripture. See Hebrews 4:12

I do believe if we study the Bible we can learn what God intends for us. But the Bible was never meant to be treated as a dictation from God.

Click to expand...

According to the Bible itself, though, it was recorded by men who were inspired by God to write what they did.

jovanovic said:

what on earth are you talking about? your view on the bible is the correct one and mine is wrong because you said so? you are not god.

Click to expand...

rjs330 said:

What I find interesting is some will staunchly deny the literal interpretation of scripture, but hold fast to the communion being the actual body and blood of Christ.

Click to expand...

I am a literalist who denies transubstantiation and the text supports that idea too.

Albion said:

Yes, but it can also be said that it is interesting that fundamentalists, etc. will staunchly affirm a literal interpretation of scripture but insist that when Jesus took bread, showed it to his disciples, and said "This is my body"...he didn't mean that literally, you know, but he was only using a figure of speech or an analogy.

Click to expand...

I am a literalist who denies transubstantiation and the text supports this idea. John 6 61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

The words are spirit and they are life. The thesis of John is found in chapter 20 where John records that the whole of his gospel was written that you would believe that Jesus is the Christ the son of the living God and in believing have eternal life. John 6 begins with

20. John 6:47-56 Very truly I tell you, the one (who believes has eternal life). I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. The idea of believing upon Jesus is what is being talked about.

It is odd when we get to Revelation and Satan is bound for 1000 years and Jesus rules for 1000 years that the same group of canabalistic literalist will allegory that passage. If I go right now and pray to the LORD I am as close as anyone else gets. Jesus will open the door to anyone who knocks we are told to enter in boldly through the tabernacle which is now open.

tulc said:

Do you think it might be because "the Word of God" isn't actually the book about Jesus but is in reality Jesus Himself?

Click to expand...

So it is an "either or" situation and not both? Jesus Christ is the living Word in a sense, but how do we come to learn and believe He is the living Word apart from the written Word?

tulc said:

And again, maybe the problem isn't really "denying" all those things but more about simply not believing your understanding of them to be the only correct way to believe? tulc(just a thought)

Click to expand...

Maybe, but then again, if a person had the time (which I do not), I think it could be demonstrated a multitude of scholarly Christians within all of the major branches and denominations of Christianity throughout the ages held a high view of Scripture, despite differences in interpretation.

rjs330 said:

What I find interesting is some will staunchly deny the literal interpretation of scripture, but hold fast to the communion being the actual body and blood of Christ.

Click to expand...

Interesting point, personally I affirm both literal and figurative language usage in Scripture.

Tree of Life said:

Well...

My view on the Bible is that it is the word of God. For this reason, I call myself a Christian.

If you call yourself a Christian but you do not believe the Bible is God's word, then what do you mean by "Christian"?

Click to expand...

Good point, if the foundation for knowledge of beliefs is full of errors, how can beliefs not be full of the same? Maybe they can hear an audible voice that I cannot, or voices in the mind, how would they distinguish between voices?

Accusatory opening, presumptive conclusions, assuming superiority of position...

Yeah, this'll go swimmingly.

Tree of Life said:

Well...

My view on the Bible is that it is the word of God. For this reason, I call myself a Christian.

If you call yourself a Christian but you do not believe the Bible is God's word, then what do you mean by "Christian"?

Click to expand...

Huh? I call myself a Christian because I'm a follower of Jesus. Luke tell us (Luke 1:1-3) that he acted like any historian: gathering evidence. Paul distinguishes between his own opinion and Jesus' teachings that had been handed down to him. (1 Cor 7:12). These were good guys doing their best to tell us what they knew about Jesus. But they were still human, with normal human limitations, depending upon human witnesses. I don't see any reason why that makes me a non-Christian. Our faith is in Christ, not the Bible.

Albion said:

According to the Bible itself, though, it was recorded by men who were inspired by God to write what they did.

Click to expand...

God inspired men to write the Bible. He didn't just *zap* it into existence. Ergo, even inspired men have biases that might creep into what they are writing, so taking every passage literally is not the correct thing to do.

Tree of Life said:

I'm constantly surprised to see posters on here who are identified as some form of Christian and yet deny basic biblical doctrines and deny the truth of the Scriptures.

Click to expand...

Short answer: A lot of people want Jesus as the Savior, but not nearly as many want Him as their Lord.

Apologetic_Warrior said:

So it is an "either or" situation and not both? Jesus Christ is the living Word in a sense, but how do we come to learn and believe He is the living Word apart from the written Word?

Click to expand...

And I have no problem with people who believe the way you do, but can we disagree about what "the Word of God" is and still acknowledge each other as being Christians who want to serve the Lord as much as we can? See, that's where my trouble starts: it's when people make the claim that the ONLY way to understand Scripture and who God is is the way they understand them. I find that idea tends to lead some very...unpleasant situations for a lot of people.

Maybe, but then again, if a person had the time (which I do not), I think it could be demonstrated a multitude of scholarly Christians within all of the major branches and denominations of Christianity throughout the ages held a high view of Scripture, despite differences in interpretation.

Click to expand...

I get that and let me also explain: I read and cherish my Bible every day, I think it represents hundreds of years of different people trying their best to serve and follow the Lord and as such it's a very important thing to understand and read, I do not however see it as the be all and end all of our relationship with God. I don't dismiss the Bible, I simply want it to be seen for what it is: it's a map TO the something I'm seeking, it's not WHAT I'm seeking. To me, too many people settle for the map when there's so much more of the "Word of God" out there.
tulc(has a lot of fun in these sorts of conversations!)