Conservatives vs. Liberals

[Christ7Life7Truth7]

This is what I have observed among Christians, for the most part.

Liberals are stereotyped as not putting forth much effort to really follow God's word; trying to manipulate the scripture to fit whatever they want it to while ignoring anything that requires some sort of sacrifice. They aren't real Christians. Conservatives are stereotyped as being closed-minded; not willing to even attempt seeing something from a different point of view. They aren't willing to accept new ideas.

To me, it seems like people are turning this into a war. It's "us" versus "them."
That doesn't sound Christian to me. I think that both sides are guilty of dehumanizing each other. It is a lot easier to say you are right, after all, when you know that the other side isn't willing to be as holy as you are trying to be, or when the other side is so unwilling to think that they could be wrong, they resemble the Nazis.

The Conservatives want to protect the Church and their traditional interpretation of the Bible. In a world of constant change, they don't want the foundation of their faith to resemble Jell-o by being constantly redefined to suit society's needs. The Liberals, on the other hand, want to have the ability to challenge the traditional interpretation of the Bible. They don't want the Church to be totalitarian or a dictatorship, and they don't want a doctrine that is so solid and immutable that it either becomes corrupt or obsolete, then shatters completely.

I think both sides have legitimate concerns. They are defending something that's worth fighting for, but most of them err by being against something that isn't worth being against. I think both sides can learn quite a bit from each other, and that it would be for the benefit of all. This isn't supposed to be a war. It shouldn't be a war. We are on the same side: trying to get closer to God by learning the truth, being humble, and seeking and thirsting after righteousness.

I see no reason why we can't start now. Conservatives and Liberals both need to be willing to listen, though.

To read or listen with the intention of faultfinding and proving that you are right, this is not pious, or humble, or Christian. Who were the faultfinders in Jesus' day? Rather than "seeking and thirsting after righteousness," the Pharisees were more concerned about their own motives. They were always trying to find faults in Jesus because they felt threatened by him, and they missed the opportunity of a lifetime: to listen to and follow God. Even Jesus rebuked the disciples when they were not of the right spirit, as I'm sure you all know. Therefore, in the spirit of honestly attempting to understand God and to grow in faith with him, I think that both sides should put their prejudice aside and honestly try to learn as much as they can from each other. For those who cannot do that now, if you really want to prove the other side wrong and have little intention of listening humbly, I think that you need to wait until you are ready to listen. Besides, if you are not willing to listen, but you want to prove the "other side" wrong, isn't it hypocritical to start a discussion? To expect people to listen while you are not willing to listen, that does not seem right.

 

[d0c markus]

im a conservative with alot of questions. I think we shouldnt try to twist the scripture to fit todays standards for any reason.
I do not think that makes the church totalitarian. And i aslo think liberals area bit to liberal sometimes. They are my brethren, i'll disagree with them, but unless they start teaching Jesus as figuarative or somthing like that I'll listen to what they have to say and examine it in light of scripture.

 

[brewmama]

This is what I have observed among Christians, for the most part.

Liberals are stereotyped as not putting forth much effort to really follow God's word; trying to manipulate the scripture to fit whatever they want it to while ignoring anything that requires some sort of sacrifice. They aren't real Christians. Conservatives are stereotyped as being closed-minded; not willing to even attempt seeing something from a different point of view. They aren't willing to accept new ideas.

To me, it seems like people are turning this into a war. It's "us" versus "them."
That doesn't sound Christian to me. I think that both sides are guilty of dehumanizing each other. It is a lot easier to say you are right, after all, when you know that the other side isn't willing to be as holy as you are trying to be, or when the other side is so unwilling to think that they could be wrong, they resemble the Nazis.

The Conservatives want to protect the Church and their traditional interpretation of the Bible. In a world of constant change, they don't want the foundation of their faith to resemble Jell-o by being constantly redefined to suit society's needs. The Liberals, on the other hand, want to have the ability to challenge the traditional interpretation of the Bible. They don't want the Church to be totalitarian or a dictatorship, and they don't want a doctrine that is so solid and immutable that it either becomes corrupt or obsolete, then shatters completely.

I think both sides have legitimate concerns. They are defending something that's worth fighting for, but most of them err by being against something that isn't worth being against. I think both sides can learn quite a bit from each other, and that it would be for the benefit of all. This isn't supposed to be a war. It shouldn't be a war. We are on the same side: trying to get closer to God by learning the truth, being humble, and seeking and thirsting after righteousness.

I see no reason why we can't start now. Conservatives and Liberals both need to be willing to listen, though.

To read or listen with the intention of faultfinding and proving that you are right, this is not pious, or humble, or Christian. Who were the faultfinders in Jesus' day? Rather than "seeking and thirsting after righteousness," the Pharisees were more concerned about their own motives. They were always trying to find faults in Jesus because they felt threatened by him, and they missed the opportunity of a lifetime: to listen to and follow God. Even Jesus rebuked the disciples when they were not of the right spirit, as I'm sure you all know. Therefore, in the spirit of honestly attempting to understand God and to grow in faith with him, I think that both sides should put their prejudice aside and honestly try to learn as much as they can from each other. For those who cannot do that now, if you really want to prove the other side wrong and have little intention of listening humbly, I think that you need to wait until you are ready to listen. Besides, if you are not willing to listen, but you want to prove the "other side" wrong, isn't it hypocritical to start a discussion? To expect people to listen while you are not willing to listen, that does not seem right.

I'm curious as to why you think compromise and "getting along" is more important than maintaining doctrine held by the Church for 2000 years. The Apostle John certainly disagreed with you when he said to flee from the heretics as if your life depended on it. The Christian doctrines never would have survived 2000 years if they had been compromised and changed to suit the changing times.

 

[indigo tree]

I'm curious as to why you think compromise and "getting along" is more important than maintaining doctrine held by the Church for 2000 years. The Apostle John certainly disagreed with you when he said to flee from the heretics as if your life depended on it. The Christian doctrines never would have survived 2000 years if they had been compromised and changed to suit the changing times.

He never said anything about changing the doctrines.When he said "getting along" he wasn't saying changing your beliefs to make the other person happy, but accepting what other people believe and not being to harsh on each other.

And your right, christ7life7truth7, as history has proved countless times , arguing and faultfinding is going to get us nowhere. Thanks for remining all of us.

 

[Christ7Life7Truth7]

I'm not trying to poke fun at anything here, but I would like to note that the doctrine has changed severely over time~

 

[Blackhawk]

This is what I have observed among Christians, for the most part.

Liberals are stereotyped as not putting forth much effort to really follow God's word; trying to manipulate the scripture to fit whatever they want it to while ignoring anything that requires some sort of sacrifice. They aren't real Christians. Conservatives are stereotyped as being closed-minded; not willing to even attempt seeing something from a different point of view. They aren't willing to accept new ideas.

To me, it seems like people are turning this into a war. It's "us" versus "them."
That doesn't sound Christian to me. I think that both sides are guilty of dehumanizing each other. It is a lot easier to say you are right, after all, when you know that the other side isn't willing to be as holy as you are trying to be, or when the other side is so unwilling to think that they could be wrong, they resemble the Nazis.

The Conservatives want to protect the Church and their traditional interpretation of the Bible. In a world of constant change, they don't want the foundation of their faith to resemble Jell-o by being constantly redefined to suit society's needs. The Liberals, on the other hand, want to have the ability to challenge the traditional interpretation of the Bible. They don't want the Church to be totalitarian or a dictatorship, and they don't want a doctrine that is so solid and immutable that it either becomes corrupt or obsolete, then shatters completely.

I think both sides have legitimate concerns. They are defending something that's worth fighting for, but most of them err by being against something that isn't worth being against. I think both sides can learn quite a bit from each other, and that it would be for the benefit of all. This isn't supposed to be a war. It shouldn't be a war. We are on the same side: trying to get closer to God by learning the truth, being humble, and seeking and thirsting after righteousness.

I see no reason why we can't start now. Conservatives and Liberals both need to be willing to listen, though.

To read or listen with the intention of faultfinding and proving that you are right, this is not pious, or humble, or Christian. Who were the faultfinders in Jesus' day? Rather than "seeking and thirsting after righteousness," the Pharisees were more concerned about their own motives. They were always trying to find faults in Jesus because they felt threatened by him, and they missed the opportunity of a lifetime: to listen to and follow God. Even Jesus rebuked the disciples when they were not of the right spirit, as I'm sure you all know. Therefore, in the spirit of honestly attempting to understand God and to grow in faith with him, I think that both sides should put their prejudice aside and honestly try to learn as much as they can from each other. For those who cannot do that now, if you really want to prove the other side wrong and have little intention of listening humbly, I think that you need to wait until you are ready to listen. Besides, if you are not willing to listen, but you want to prove the "other side" wrong, isn't it hypocritical to start a discussion? To expect people to listen while you are not willing to listen, that does not seem right.

I think you are right in many ways. However I think that some doctrines should never be changed and if some are then Christianity is no longer Christianity. But then again others should be changed. There was a time when pretty much all of Christendom thought slavery was okay. That had to change and I am very glad it did. I guess that is why I believe in sola scriptura so much. The doctrines of man may change but the Bible does not. I do not want to get into that debate though.

But for the most part you are right. And you are dead on right if some of the statements are not taken too far.

Let me tell you though that I have first hand experience of conservative and moderate (not even liberal) Christians fighting. I hate it and do not think it is very Christian. Some things are worth fighting for but one must know when to fight and how to fight and I think that is what many forget.

 

[FOMWatts<><]

I think it utterly important to remember that though MAn may change his mind, God does NOT change His mind. god is the same yesterday today and forever. If He said it was wrong then it is wrong today as well. I think it also important to define what heresy is, after all Martin Luther was viewed as a heretic and all he was a Bible believeing man out to change the way people thought, which happened to include NOt thinkign for themselves and lettign untrustworthy people lead them spiritually. I for one am all for someone that wants to share their interpretation of scripture, THIS is how we learn and come to understand what we believe, even if that belief complety goes against what others say

Blessings,

FOMWatts<><

 

[d0c markus]

I think it utterly important to remember that though MAn may change his mind, God does NOT change His mind. god is the same yesterday today and forever. If He said it was wrong then it is wrong today as well. I think it also important to define what heresy is, after all Martin Luther was viewed as a heretic and all he was a Bible believeing man out to change the way people thought, which happened to include NOt thinkign for themselves and lettign untrustworthy people lead them spiritually. I for one am all for someone that wants to share their interpretation of scripture, THIS is how we learn and come to understand what we believe, even if that belief complety goes against what others say

Blessings,

FOMWatts<><

preach it brotha! AMEN!

 

[NeonBlack]

you can be conservatively liberal, or liberally conservative


i think those are poor stereotypes about the people behind the right and left wings...

most of america is in the middle... and the extremists are on the wings

 

[brewmama]

I'm not trying to poke fun at anything here, but I would like to note that the doctrine has changed severely over time~

Not in the Orthodox Church.

 

[Blackhawk]

Not in the Orthodox Church.

Really? I know it did in the beggining. The Trinity was not understood from the begining. Again some would say that the theology has changed but not the doctrines but theology makes up doctrines so if the theology changes so does the doctrines. So the orthodox church has atleast changed from thevery beginning.

 

[Mark the Builder]

I really can't believe some of the things I've just read. Are there no more conservative theologians out there? In the Christian realm there are those who are either for Chrsit or they are against Christ. For the most part liberal theolgians preach heresy not truth. Therefore they cannot be considered as believers and fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. 'What fellowship can light have with darkness?' In my opinion liberal theologians have damaged the church. They preach a false gospel that will not only send them to hell but all those who've innocently but ignorantly bought into their message.

I understand your desire to be 'nice' and all, but within the areana of truth where men's souls are at stake, is not the place to hold hands with the enemy, eat birdseed, strum a guitar and sing 'He's got the whole world in his hands."

May God help us not to become complacent to the point of accepting heretics into the fellowship. Remember they are wolves in sheeps clothing that care nothing about the sheep. They will destroy you if given a chance.

 

[Blackhawk]

I really can't believe some of the things I've just read. Are there no more conservative theologians out there? In the Christian realm there are those who are either for Chrsit or they are against Christ. For the most part liberal theolgians preach heresy not truth. Therefore they cannot be considered as believers and fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. 'What fellowship can light have with darkness?' In my opinion liberal theologians have damaged the church. They preach a false gospel that will not only send them to hell but all those who've innocently but ignorantly bought into their message.

I understand your desire to be 'nice' and all, but within the areana of truth where men's souls are at stake, is not the place to hold hands with the enemy, eat birdseed, strum a guitar and sing 'He's got the whole world in his hands."

May God help us not to become complacent to the point of accepting heretics into the fellowship. Remember they are wolves in sheeps clothing that care nothing about the sheep. They will destroy you if given a chance.

well what is your definition of liberal theolgians? What are some examples of their teachings? What are the essentials of the Christian faith?

Also a little note I go to a very conservative seminary. So conservative now in fact I view myself as a moderate if compared to it. But how unconservative must one be before one is not a Christian?

 

[seebs]

The history of Christianity is full of groups of people who describe each others' positions as heresy.

In fact, the solution is simple. Don't identify as being of this or that group, but of Christ. This shows where the boundary goes. "Liberal" and "Conservative" groupings are just a distraction.

 

[Blackhawk]

The history of Christianity is full of groups of people who describe each others' positions as heresy.

In fact, the solution is simple. Don't identify as being of this or that group, but of Christ. This shows where the boundary goes. "Liberal" and "Conservative" groupings are just a distraction.

I understand what you are saying here Seebs (And welcome back ) but I can't fully agree with you. I think labels help us identify how we think differently so we can easier discuss our them. I think the problem comes when we want ot pigeon hole people into one label or another or force the stereotypical beliefs of that label into the the belief of individuals. But just to say I am "Of Christ" does not really help completely unless we dfine what we mean by that. Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, and Catholics all say they are "Of Christ" but teach very different things. So I think we need to define what we mean by that. That is where the proper use of labels comes in and I think also one of the proper uses of denominationalism. If I meet a Roman Catholic I have some idea what he or she believes and I do nto see that is wrong. The problem is when I say all Catholics are heretics or going to hell. That is a sterotype and a wrong use of labeling. I think you are fighting against the misuses of labels but I can't agree that there are no uses.

 

[greeker57married]

I am a Southern Baptist Pastor of a small church. Southern Baptist have been dealing with this controversy for 25 years or longer. When I first started to college at a Baptist university, my Old Testament professor was a liberal theologian. He did not believe in a personal devil, he did not believe that thefirst eleven chapters of Genesis wa real history, He did not believe the miracles in the Bible. This professor caused many young students to doubt the Word of God. After the fall semester and winter term I left and God led me to a bible believing Baptist college.

A Liberal is some one who does not believe that all of Scripture is the imspired Word of God. There are various degrees of liberalism. The radical liberal does not believe the Bible is inspired. This Liberal professor I had, did not believe that the Bible was the revealed Word of God from God, that has man had faith that certain events were of God he wrote it down. But man makes mistakes.

The Battle among Southern Baptist has been between conservative(those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture as orginally given) and moderate liberals who say they the Bible is the Word of God, but that it is not inspired in matters of science, history and chronology. They have been spoon fed neo-orthodox theology. The believe that their are human mistakes in Scripture.

The Controversy among Southern Baptist is not over the interpetation of Scripture, but over the nature of Scripture. Even though the News Media, who does not understand the SBC controversy, says it is over interpretation.

But it concerns if the Bible is the Word of God in its entirety or does it just contain the Word of God. If one is liberal it will effect his or her theology.
Theological liberalism is a cancer that is a parasite. It has to suck off Bible believing Churches and schools and denominations.

Liberal theology kills the spiritual life of a person, church or demonination.
When I was at this liberal Baptist college, you were laughed at if you believed in winning the lost to Jesus Christ.

I am thankful for the conservative resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention. This has and is turning many of our schools around to Bible Believing beliefs.

Liberals through dishonesty got into our schools and seminaries and the moderates controlled our denomination for many years. They were dishonest about their liberalism. Our churches are still suffering from liberal and moderate influence as it sapped spiritual life out of them. It will take many years for their to be a overall change, if there ever is.

In short liberalism denies much of the authority of the Word of God. I have rubbed shoulders with both concervative and liberal pastors and teachers down through the years. Yes we should respond in Christ love, but with firmness.