Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Makes sense- I suppose many of them thought that.I am not sure it is my definition to make, but I suspect the intention of the author is to describe an ultra-right wing Christians who thinks participating in the January 6 event storming the U.S. Capital in an effort to overturn an election is/was a proper thing for a Christian to be doing.
Well, sure, I could argue that no two human beings ever hold exactly the same thought in exactly the same way.That's great if people attempt to do so, but that in no way exposes what they actually think. And I'll venture that no two Christians in the world think in only terms of identical sets of "official systematic hermeneutics." Not that it wouldn't help if there was such a thing.
Did Jesus and his followers storm Pilate's court?If I could be like Christ, He wouldn't have need to die for me. I can try my best but I think He would have stormed the Capitol!
Well, sure, I could argue that no two human beings ever hold exactly the same thought in exactly the same way.
I could argue that if we showed two humans a red rose, they are not actually seeing the same hue of red because of the variation of cones in their eyes.
But to the extent that humans can share the same concept in what they think is the same way, there are people have done so with the bible, just like two people can look at a red rose and agree that the rose is red even if their eyes aren't truly producing the same effect in their brains.
Back in the mid-1600s, there was a remarkable man, Roger Williams, a Puritan pastor who came to America in 1631. He was originally a Puritan but became a Separatist over the next few years. Besides founding the first Baptist congregation in America, and besides being a great and trusted friend to the Native Americans, and besides being one of the original Abolitionists against slavery, he also established Rhode Island as a co-op corporation (the only colony that was not a for-profit venture). He established Rhode Island as the only colony permitting total religious freedom, in his own words: "...even for the Musselman [Muslim] and the heathen [atheist]."The "storm the Capitol kind" is the kind that are sworn to do that which Christ the Lord refused to do, which is, to use temporal power to force hypocrisy upon our neighbors of this world. This was the ethos of Constantine, Charlemagne, and many, many others. The Holy One has been taking power from it increasingly in the last five or six hundred years, but it still motivates many whose preachers preach it.
"Official systematic hermeneutics" is a formal methodology. I don't think it's necessary for us to use the same formal methodology.But RD, I wasn't referring to two human beings holding the exact same thought. Rather, I was referring to the same "official systematic hermeneutics." And the truth is, we don't, even if and when we may hold to some of the same statements of dogma.
"Official systematic hermeneutics" is a formal methodology. I don't think it's necessary for us to use the same formal methodology.
Paul told us there were "disputable matters."Right. Now you're getting what I was inferring to. And our Trinitarian solidarity and brotherhood doesn't depend on having the same formal methodology. And even if we did have one, it wouldn't guarantee the proliferation of individually diverse perceptions. At least, not on the civil side of life.
God gave us a Living Logos by which to live and to find Eternal Life, not a systematic set of spiritualized logistics. And, despite what our High-Church Tradition brethren may insist otherwise, I think we have to expect and allow for some diversity among us (without going all DEI about it at the same time.)
Paul told us there were "disputable matters."
It's funny because I've spoken with people who were certain that if we finally just get our hermeneutics right, we'd all agree on the basics. And I just can't help but see that as overly optimistic.But RD, I wasn't referring to two human beings holding the exact same thought. Rather, I was referring to the same "official systematic hermeneutics." And the truth is, we don't, even if and when we may hold to some of the same statements of dogma.
It's funny because I've spoken with people who were certain that if we finally just get our hermeneutics right, we'd all agree on the basics. And I just can't help but see that as overly optimistic.
Amen I agree 100% and if it isn’t teaching to repent of sinful behavior, let’s not call it Christianity.From the article Inauguration Week Was a Collision of Two Christianities at religionnew.com. Do we have two Christianities? (Posted here for discussion about the theology, not the politics).
"What we are seeing is a tale of two Christianities. It’s why we now have T-shirts that say, “I’m a love your neighbor Christian not a storm the Capitol kind.” There are competing narratives of what the Christian faith is fundamentally about and what our priorities should be as followers of Jesus......The word “Christian” means “Christ-like.” If it doesn’t look like Jesus, and it doesn’t sound like Jesus … let’s not call it Christianity. If it’s not about love and mercy … let’s not call it Christianity. If it’s not good news to the poor … let’s not call it Christianity. If it’s not about welcoming the stranger … let’s not call it Christianity. "
Religionnews.com
Well, my theory on why Jesus said this was because the unbelieving Jews were not permitted to understand and repent and believe according to Mark 4:11-12 because they were partially hardened by The Father according to Romans 11:25 which is why they were not permitted to come to Christ according to John 6:44 in order to bring about God’s plan of salvation thru Christ’s crucifixion. So in that particular situation forgiving people who’s hearts were hardened in order to fulfill God’s plan seems very reasonable.-Ok so you are saying Jesus did not say “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.”
Even though this is in The Bible as something Jesus stated
I can answer that because I know for a fact that d Taylor teaches that all a person has to do is believe for 5 minutes and he’s saved no matter what he does afterwards.Why would a person follow Jesus and not believe in Him? And does believing in Jesus imply Christlikeness as well-or is only belief necessary?
You can follow Jesus' teachings without ever having saving faith in him, as many do in this world.Why would a person follow Jesus and not believe in Him? And does believing in Jesus imply Christlikeness as well-or is only belief necessary?
All right. By the same token can you believe in Him without following His teachings, without overcoming sin, without growing in likeness to Him?You can follow Jesus' teachings without ever having saving faith in him, as many do in this world.
Why would a person follow Jesus and not believe in Him? And does believing in Jesus imply Christlikeness as well-or is only belief necessary?
That would be counterfeit (false) faith, not genuine saving faith, and a counterfeit faith from which one could apostasize.All right. By the same token can you believe in Him without following His teachings, without overcoming sin, without growing in likeness to Him?
Jesus expects that mercy, that grace, that love, to have an effect, to make a change, in us:
“For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.” Matt 6:14-15
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?