Anathema Topics

[BenAdam]

So....

to start a little vocabulary lesson:

a·nath·e·ma –noun, plural -mas. 1.a person or thing detested or loathed: That subject is anathema to him. 2.a person or thing accursed or consigned to damnation or destruction. 3.a formal ecclesiastical curse involving excommunication. 4.any imprecation of divine punishment. 5.a curse; execration.


What subjects are anathema to you?

Universalism? Preterism? Modalism? Monophytism?

 

[jeolmstead]

I’m not keen on eschatology,

I am always amazed at the time and effort spent debating something that has “zero” to do with how we are supposed to be living and serving right now.

However, It sells a lot of books……

John O.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Interesting topic:

How do you mark the difference, especially in a public forum, between something that is anathema and something that is incendiary.

in·cen·di·ar·y

Audio Help /ɪnˈsɛn

diˌɛr

i/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-sen-dee-er-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, noun, plural -ar·ies. –adjective 1.used or adapted for setting property on fire: incendiary bombs. 2.of or pertaining to the criminal setting on fire of property. 3.tending to arouse strife, sedition, etc.; inflammatory: incendiary speeches. 4.tending to inflame the senses: an incendiary extravaganza of music and dance. –noun 5.a person who deliberately sets fire to buildings or other property, as an arsonist. 6.Military. a shell, bomb, or grenade containing napalm, thermite, or some other substance that burns with an intense heat. 7.a person who stirs up strife, sedition, etc.; an agitator.

While such subjects like:

Universalism? Preterism? Modalism? Monophytism?

Can very well be anathema to Christians because they fly in the face of our core beliefs. But there are some nuances, differences in teachings that the mere mention of them causes strife and division.

How do you mark between the two?

 

[BenAdam]

Interesting topic:

How do you mark the difference, especially in a public forum, between something that is anathema and something that is incendiary.

in·cen·di·ar·y

Audio Help /ɪnˈsɛn

diˌɛr

i/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-sen-dee-er-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, noun, plural -ar·ies. –adjective 1.used or adapted for setting property on fire: incendiary bombs. 2.of or pertaining to the criminal setting on fire of property. 3.tending to arouse strife, sedition, etc.; inflammatory: incendiary speeches. 4.tending to inflame the senses: an incendiary extravaganza of music and dance. –noun 5.a person who deliberately sets fire to buildings or other property, as an arsonist. 6.Military. a shell, bomb, or grenade containing napalm, thermite, or some other substance that burns with an intense heat. 7.a person who stirs up strife, sedition, etc.; an agitator.

While such subjects like:

Universalism? Preterism? Modalism? Monophytism?

Can very well be anathema to Christians because they fly in the face of our core beliefs. But there are some nuances, differences in teachings that the mere mention of them causes strife and division.

How do you mark between the two?

An excellent question. I guess it is like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Let's take modalism for example. Personally, not a big deal to me. I could discuss its merits and drawbacks without loosing a wink of sleep. Some wouldn't hesitate to pronounce blasphemy in all caps and label the discussion heretical and pm every admin/mod/chaplain/window cleaner that the discussion is not in accordance with the Nicene Creed.

Slavery could be another excellent example. I personally would feel no issues in discussing whether or not the Bible condems it, others would chaff that the discussion is happening at all.

I think perhaps understanding your audience should come into play and in the intrest of the weaker brother some things should be avoided or dealt with sensitively. Sometimes though the attempt to control debate tries to masquarade as weakness and then it should be resisted.

 

[BenAdam]

I’m not keen on eschatology,

I am always amazed at the time and effort spent debating something that has “zero” to do with how we are supposed to be living and serving right now.

However, It sells a lot of books……

John O.

You got that right John. Going to what brother Balance said, it can become quite incendiary.

 

[ShammahBenJudah]

Can very well be anathema to Christians because they fly in the face of our core beliefs. But there are some nuances, differences in teachings that the mere mention of them causes strife and division.

How do you mark between the two?

One protects the sheep, the other wounds them. When the dust settles, who's bleeding...the wolf or the sheep?

 

[Andry]

What subjects are anathema to you?

Universalism? Preterism? Modalism? Monophytism?

Obfuscation.

Not necessarily a subject, more of what people do to spiritualize their flesh, such as obfuscating "God wants to bless me so I can be a blessing to others" as a cloak for their material greed, or promoting a non-tithing doctrine so that they don't really have to give, etc.

That's anathema to me.

 

[BenAdam]

Obfuscation.

Not necessarily a subject, more of what people do to spiritualize their flesh, such as obfuscating "God wants to bless me so I can be a blessing to others" as a cloak for their material greed, or promoting a non-tithing doctrine so that they don't really have to give, etc.

That's anathema to me.

Agreed. And I'm sure I have been guilty and will be guilty of it in the future myself.

 

[Tamara224]

Topics don't create strife, people create strife.

 

[Deba]

Agreed. And I'm sure I have been guilty and will be guilty of it in the future myself.

This is troubling for me. Why would you so blithely make a statement that you are going to do something you believe to be wrong in the future, when a simple honest decison on your part to not repeat the behaviour would go a long way in preventing a reoccurance?

Don't you believe you have the ability to change your own behaviours?

 

[Andry]

This is troubling for me. Why would you so blithely make a statement that you are going to do something you believe to be wrong in the future, when a simple honest decison on your part to not repeat the behaviour would go a long way in preventing a reoccurance?

Don't you believe you have the ability to change your own behaviours?

Nope. We do not have the ability to change our own behaviour.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Mere theism... by that I mean the tendency among modern churches/Christians after discovering salvation by faith in Christ and His cross, to then digress back into a theological description of God rather than walking by the Jesus revelation of the Father.

Makes a lot of people mad to suggest they are doing this.

Tells me that there much be something to it because so many people shoot back.

I have even been reported for mentioning the term.

Shhhhhhh......

 

[Deba]

Nope. We do not have the ability to change our own behaviour.

Of course people can change their own behaviors, heathans do it all the time.

A fruit of the Spirit is self-control. That's to help make our chosen changes even easier and to help us see the changes me need to choose to make.

The clay pot is an analagy. People have free will.

 

[BenAdam]

This is troubling for me. Why would you so blithely make a statement that you are going to do something you believe to be wrong in the future, when a simple honest decison on your part to not repeat the behaviour would go a long way in preventing a reoccurance?

Don't you believe you have the ability to change your own behaviours?

Because I have no confidence in the flesh. I know that I am frail and that I will occasionally give into my flesh. Doesn't mean that I will allow it to reign, but I am not so haughty as to believe I won't give into it.

 

[jeolmstead]

This is troubling for me. Why would you so blithely make a statement that you are going to do something you believe to be wrong in the future, when a simple honest decison on your part to not repeat the behaviour would go a long way in preventing a reoccurance?

Don't you believe you have the ability to change your own behaviours?

All I can say for sure is that with the Lords help I have changed mine.

John O.

 

[Andry]

Of course people can change their own behaviors, heathans do it all the time.

A fruit of the Spirit is self-control. That's to help make our chosen changes even easier and to help us see the changes me need to choose to make.

The clay pot is an analagy. People have free will.

Perhaps I wasn't being explicit. Yes, there's self-empowerment and self-improvement, and all that. By "ourself" we can change a lot of our behaviour. But the type of change that brings permanency is only through the Holy Spirit.

 

[Deba]

Because I have no confidence in the flesh. I know that I am frail and that I will occasionally give into my flesh. Doesn't mean that I will allow it to reign, but I am not so haughty as to believe I won't give into it.

Personal transparency is a much better choice than obfustaction - especially for a Christian. And there was no trace of anything but continued acceptance of your bad habit in your original post.

 

[BenAdam]

Dids topic of Mere Theism is anathema to me. Seems like you apply it as a pejorative to what you disagree with.

 

[BenAdam]

Personal transparency is a much better choice than obfustaction - especially for a Christian. And there was no trace of anything but continued acceptance of your bad habit in your original post.

Not acceptance of bad behaviour, but resigned acknolwedgement that I will not reach perfection in this life.

 

[freedomnchrist]

I am so lost!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't keep up!!!!!!

*cries silently*