Liberal Christians

[GadFly]

It is very good to see true believers in the authority of the scriptures coming forward to tell the truth about good old time born again Christianity. I believe (it all)! That is what is being said here. Good job guys.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

What I mean is the world seems to be filling up with liberal Christianity by the minute. Those who decide it is ok to drink in moderation or do drugs because God made them or date several people at once, look at inappropriate material because it "does not hurt anyone", accepting of worldly ways and things. Women not being submissive, men not taking the lead, woman dressing provocatively, men "checking out" every woman who walks by. Those are just a few examples. The list goes on for miles. Nobody seems to be concerned with avoiding the appearance of evil these days. Ok, just my two cents

With this rather odd and highly legalistic definition of conservative, I certainly don't qualify. Very few would, other than Independent Fundamental Baptists, and mostly extreme ones at that (IFBX, they're sometimes called).

OTOH, I've been an on-again, off-again member of Conservative Christians since almost the beginning, and I'm 100% on the historic "five fundamentals" and the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds.

 

[WannaWitness]

I just think "conservative" covers such a wide variety of things that it can hold a different meaning to a variety of people, therefore, they draw the line in many places. In my encounters with different types of people, I find I can be quite conservative when it comes to my views on a few issues (being called something of a "Bible-thumper" for so much as voicing some of my convictions), yet not so much in others to the point where I could be moderate (and maybe even "liberal" in the eyes of some, although I don't think so).

Here is a common example: Modesty is a widely debated issue in the realm of Christianity. The conservative in me says that this issue should be more of a concern than what it seems to be. But there are actually people who are so strict that they think a woman is dressing "provocatively" if they so much as wear a pair of jeans. Of course it's their conviction, but some of them (note that I said "some") might feel they are superior to everyone else because of that conviction. So, in their eyes, a woman who wears pants most of the time (like myself) would be considered "liberal".

Now take this, and add it to the seemingly countless other "gray" issues (like Bible versions, politics, music, and such), and we have quite a mess on our hands, just for the sake of having different opinions. Here's where Romans 14 comes in, which mentions eating meat, but can be applied to many other things. It's not giving an "excuse to be lukewarm" (as others undoubtedly have read into this Scripture); it's just encouraging us as believers to respect one another despite having different views on "doubtful things" as mentioned in verse 1, which could very well cover the issues I mentioned above, and more. This isn't to say that we can't have healthy debate and discussions on such issues; it's just that there comes a time to "agree to disagree", and realize that all Christians ultimately strive for the same goal, which is pleasing God the best we know how, and a home in Heaven (where we will be stuck with one another for an eternity, and none of the differences we've been having here on earth will matter anymore).

Myself included, we all need to get better about examining ourselves and our own weaknesses and flaws, and not judging another person, or "removing the speck from our brother's eye while overlooking the plank in our own", (referring to Matthew 7:1-5).

Sorry for rambling on; it's just what's on my heart right now. I only hope it makes some sort of sense.

 

[jpcedotal]

One is either of the world or of God. A lukewarm mixture where one proclaims "I am a Christian, but what I feel is right overrides Scripture."

Just does not make any sense to me.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

One is either of the world or of God. A lukewarm mixture where one proclaims "I am a Christian, but what I feel is right overrides Scripture."

Just does not make any sense to me.

Yeah, but...

The kind of stuff the OP was talking about has nothing to do with Scripture. It has to do with being part of a particular American subculture, based in part on Yankee Puritanism and in part on Southern Redneckism.

Oh, wait. I misspoke. It does have something to do with Scripture. They are the same type of people Paul was preaching against in Galatians.

YouTube - ‪I'm a Christ Follower (Mac vs. PC Parody) Part 07 - LIVE!‬‏

 

[mwood30]

Liberal Christians love Christ just as much as conservatives. We view his message differently though. We believe:

1. Treating others the same way you want to be treated is Jesus' entire Law (Matthew 7:12)
2. God desires love of others for the forgiveness of sins, not a sacrifice (Matthew 9:13)
3. It is our love for others that frees us from the Works of the Torah (Luke 11:41)
4. On judgment day humanity will be divided into two groups based solely on the altruism of their deeds (Matthew 25:31-46)
5. Repentance means making the needs of others equal to our own (Luke 3:8-11)

If Jesus' teachings on the Law, judgment, freedom from the Torah, and repentance are all based on the Golden Rule, it just seems wise to us to embrace the one thing that links all of his teachings together. I've always struggled to understand why conservatives find that repulsive.

 

[StartedAtEly]

Are there really any good old fashioned conservative Christians out there anymore? If so, I want to find you! lol. I am so sad to see the Christian population has become so liberal in their morals, thinking etc....

If you hear the words "mainstream/mainline protestant" you know it means "left wing sell-outs"

 

[BondiHarry]

Liberal Christians love Christ just as much as conservatives. We view his message differently though. We believe:

1. Treating others the same way you want to be treated is Jesus' entire Law (Matthew 7:12)
2. God desires love of others for the forgiveness of sins, not a sacrifice (Matthew 9:13)
3. It is our love for others that frees us from the Works of the Torah (Luke 11:41)
4. On judgment day humanity will be divided into two groups based solely on the altruism of their deeds (Matthew 25:31-46)
5. Repentance means making the needs of others equal to our own (Luke 3:8-11)

If Jesus' teachings on the Law, judgment, freedom from the Torah, and repentance are all based on the Golden Rule, it just seems wise to us to embrace the one thing that links all of his teachings together. I've always struggled to understand why conservatives find that repulsive.

If we love God we will keep His commandments (and Jesus reminds us in Matthew 7 that NO worker of iniquity will inherit the kingdom of God, not even those who call Him 'Lord, Lord'). If we love our fellow man we will help him in his need and we will do him no evil. Unfortunately many have replaced the Godly love that Jesus taught with a more satisfying (to them) love based on what feels right to them. If a man loves and desires another man rather than a woman, that is okay and the scripture which condemns this is in error. If a woman finds the idea of motherhood inconvenient and finds herself carrying a new life in her womb, it is okay to dispose of that inconvenient life rather than burden herself with the responsibilities that life would bring.

God desires that we be holy and it is a mistake to think that the 'law' was meant to make us holy; it wasn't. It was meant in part to convict us of our own sinfulness and our need for a savior. It is through the grace of Jesus Christ and the transformation that God's indwelling Holy Spirit works in us that enables us to become holy (albeit we still have our flesh warring against our new man).

Repentance is far more than making the needs of others equal to our own, it is a change of mind regarding the sin in our lives as well. That change of mind is inevitable with the work that God does in our lives. That change of mind is impossible without God working in our lives.

 

[sealacamp]

One is either of the world or of God. A lukewarm mixture where one proclaims "I am a Christian, but what I feel is right overrides Scripture."

Just does not make any sense to me.

I agree it doesn't make sense at all and that is just what the OP was talking about.

The kind of stuff the OP was talking about has nothing to do with Scripture. It has to do with being part of a particular American subculture, based in part on Yankee Puritanism and in part on Southern Redneckism.

How do you get that from this?

Are there really any good old fashioned conservative Christians out there anymore? If so, I want to find you! lol. I am so sad to see the Christian population has become so liberal in their morals, thinking etc..

If we are talking about the moral degeneration of many who claim Christ yet reject His truth then the OP is dead on. If we are talking about people thinking is ways that lead away from Christ then the OP is dead on. And from the posts that I have read in this thread this is what we are talking about and it does relate to scripture and it does have everything to do with what the Lord has asked for us to do with our lives in Him. So I don't understand what you are talking about at all.

Sealacamp

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

How do you get that from this?





If we are talking about the moral degeneration of many who claim Christ yet reject His truth then the OP is dead on. If we are talking about people thinking is ways that lead away from Christ then the OP is dead on. And from the posts that I have read in this thread this is what we are talking about and it does relate to scripture and it does have everything to do with what the Lord has asked for us to do with our lives in Him. So I don't understand what you are talking about at all.

Sealacamp

I didn't get it from the OP's first post, but from her third, which seems to me to indicate a heavy focus on externals and legalities. It's all about being prim, proper, fitting into 1950's 'Father Knows Best' culture and keeping up appearances rather than about following Christ. It gave me flashbacks of my last visit to an IFB church:

What I mean is the world seems to be filling up with liberal Christianity by the minute. Those who decide it is ok to drink in moderation or do drugs because God made them or date several people at once, look at inappropriate material because it "does not hurt anyone", accepting of worldly ways and things. Women not being submissive, men not taking the lead, woman dressing provocatively, men "checking out" every woman who walks by. Those are just a few examples. The list goes on for miles. Nobody seems to be concerned with avoiding the appearance of evil these days. Ok, just my two cents

I say again, this has nothing to do with Scripture... except in the sense of being like the people Jesus and Paul used as bad examples.

 

[mwood30]

If we love God we will keep His commandments (and Jesus reminds us in Matthew 7 that NO worker of iniquity will inherit the kingdom of God, not even those who call Him 'Lord, Lord'). If we love our fellow man we will help him in his need and we will do him no evil. Unfortunately many have replaced the Godly love that Jesus taught with a more satisfying (to them) love based on what feels right to them. If a man loves and desires another man rather than a woman, that is okay and the scripture which condemns this is in error. If a woman finds the idea of motherhood inconvenient and finds herself carrying a new life in her womb, it is okay to dispose of that inconvenient life rather than burden herself with the responsibilities that life would bring.

God desires that we be holy and it is a mistake to think that the 'law' was meant to make us holy; it wasn't. It was meant in part to convict us of our own sinfulness and our need for a savior. It is through the grace of Jesus Christ and the transformation that God's indwelling Holy Spirit works in us that enables us to become holy (albeit we still have our flesh warring against our new man).

Repentance is far more than making the needs of others equal to our own, it is a change of mind regarding the sin in our lives as well. That change of mind is inevitable with the work that God does in our lives. That change of mind is impossible without God working in our lives.

The Greek word in Matthew 7 was anomian which meant:those who break the Law. In context, Jesus had just stated that the Golden Rule is the Law, and he said he will send away everyone who breaks this Law:

In everything, therefore, treat others the same way you want to be treated for this is the Law and the Prophets. Come enter through the narrow gate....

Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’

And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; Depart from me, you who broke the Law.’
​

When we read the passage in context, it's the violators of the Golden Rule who are sent away... not some abstract workers of iniquity.

And as for repentance, the repentance necessary to avoid the fire is 100% based on making the needs of others equal to our own:

Bear fruits corresponding to repentance and don’t begin to say to yourselves, “We have Abraham for our Father. For I tell you that from these stones God could raise up children to Abraham, and the axe is already laid at the root of the trees.

Therefore every tree that does not bear exceptional fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.”

And the crowds were questioning him saying, “Therefore what should we do?”

And he answered them saying, “The man who has two shirts is to share with him who has none. And he who has food is to do likewise.”
​

The Gospels are very clear on these topics, at least it seems that way to me.

 

[BondiHarry]

mwood30, one of the most dangerous things men can ever think is 'it seems that way to me' (lean not on your own understanding). Part of the iniquity that Jesus and the apostles taught about is the evil that men do to one another (Romans 13:9-10) hence no thief, liar, false witness, murderer, fornicator or adulterer will inherit the kingdom of God and this, AGAIN, is the problem we conservatives have with liberalism, you construct a gospel 'as it seems to you' substituting love as men view it for love as God teaches and repentance that falls far short of the mark.

 

[katautumn]

I'm still trying to figure out where people get this idea that the Golden Rule supersedes some countless other verses of Scripture that deal with holiness and living a life that reflects the character of Christ (which is holy). It sure would be nice if being a Christian was a simple as being nice, but that's not what it's about. Being nice, apart from that kindness being the supernatural fruit of the Holy Spirit, is as filthy rags in God's eyes. It's done for selfish reasons. The love that is the fruit of the Spirit is not loving everyone to the point where you never judge their behaviors or rebuke them gently when they profess Christ, and yet continue to live as a reprobate.

 

[Searching_for_Christ]

So folks that go to hell are only people that break the golden rule? How can this be possible? there are sins that harm none but yourself...are these sins suddenly made not sin, because of this golden rule? seem rather fishy to me.

 

[mwood30]

mwood30, one of the most dangerous things men can ever think is 'it seems that way to me' (lean not on your own understanding). Part of the iniquity that Jesus and the apostles taught about is the evil that men do to one another (Romans 13:9-10) hence no thief, liar, false witness, murderer, fornicator or adulterer will inherit the kingdom of God and this, AGAIN, is the problem we conservatives have with liberalism, you construct a gospel 'as it seems to you' substituting love as men view it for love as God teaches and repentance that falls far short of the mark.

I thinks it's strange that I've quoted far more verses and I'm the one being accused of making something up. The reason this seems to me is that I've never heard a conservative give a scriptural rebuttal (usually just the kind of rebuttal you did). And any scriptural rebuttal usually contradicts the Greek (as your rebuttal did).

1 Corinthians 6:9 has the Greek word adikia which referred to the unjust, inequitable, unfair treatment of others. If you read the passage that comes before it, you will see that Paul is warning Christians who are bringing fraudulent lawsuits against each other that no "unjust, inequitable, unfair person" will enter the kingdom of God. Then he proceeds to give a list of those in Corinth who are well known for their unjust, inequitable, unfair treatment of others. In other words, those who violate the Golden Rule.

I used the "it seems to me" to be polite. But if you guys are going rip someone apart for being polite, let me take the gloves off. All the scripture I read in Greek says the Golden Rule is the deciding factor. I'll stick to the Greek Bible, as most liberals do.

 

[mwood30]

So folks that go to hell are only people that break the golden rule? How can this be possible? there are sins that harm none but yourself...are these sins suddenly made not sin, because of this golden rule? seem rather fishy to me.

Have you ever noticed that when Paul talked about sins that only harm yourself, he described them as non-mortal sins? For example, in 1 Corinthians 5 where a man is sleeping with his father's wife, that is a mortal sin. But then in 1 Corinthians 6 when Paul is describing single people having sex with prostitutes the worst he can say is it's "lawful, but not profitable." Why the stark difference? The Golden Rule of course.

Now did God want people to do more than follow the Golden Rule? Yes, he wants people to not just avoid the mortal sins, but the non-mortal ones too. But we should never blur the strict line of the Golden Rule, lest we contradict Jesus and Paul.

 

[mwood30]

I'm still trying to figure out where people get this idea that the Golden Rule supersedes some countless other verses of Scripture that deal with holiness and living a life that reflects the character of Christ (which is holy). It sure would be nice if being a Christian was a simple as being nice, but that's not what it's about. Being nice, apart from that kindness being the supernatural fruit of the Holy Spirit, is as filthy rags in God's eyes. It's done for selfish reasons. The love that is the fruit of the Spirit is not loving everyone to the point where you never judge their behaviors or rebuke them gently when they profess Christ, and yet continue to live as a reprobate.

You mistake being "nice" with the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule is much higher standard than being nice. It means making the needs of others equal to your own in every way. I'm not sure why you consider it a low standard. Jesus himself said it's so difficult that few will ever find it. (Matthew 7:12-14)

 

[lismore]

It's done for selfish reasons.

Hello

I disagree. Love is selflless! Not selfish:
1 Cor 13.
3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8 Love never fails.


There is no room for fear in love because perfect love casts out all fear! God is love.

I think what you are describing is not love, rather some seemingly good works done because of insecurity, an obsessive and irrational fear of hell, an obsessive compulsion about sins and holiness which in the end does not lead to holiness. Insecure people do not become holy. It either leads to self-righteousness or burn out.

Holiness is given by Jesus, he was made sin so that we would become the righteousness of God. We cant earn it, only receive it as a gift.

God Bless

 

[BondiHarry]

I thinks it's strange that I've quoted far more verses and I'm the one being accused of making something up. The reason this seems to me is that I've never heard a conservative give a scriptural rebuttal (usually just the kind of rebuttal you did). And any scriptural rebuttal usually contradicts the Greek (as your rebuttal did).

That single verse I cited destroys the picture you paint. If you are familiar with the Bible you would know there are a multitude of verses that show God hates numerous things from pride to greed to sexual immorality and these are cited over and over again as things that those who do them will not inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Corinthians 6:9 has the Greek word adikia which referred to the unjust, inequitable, unfair treatment of others. If you read the passage that comes before you, you will see that Paul is warning Christians who are bringing fraudulent lawsuits against each other that no "unjust, inequitable, unfair person" will enter the kingdom of God. Then he proceeds to give a list of those in Corinth who are well known for their unjust, inequitable, unfair treatment of others. In other words, those who violate the Golden Rule.

I used the "it seems to me" to be polite. But if you guys are going rip someone apart for being polite, let me take the gloves off. All the scripture I read in Greek says the Golden Rule is the deciding factor. I'll stick to the Greek Bible, as most liberals do.

We are not ripping you apart for being polite, we are challenging the error in your version of the truth.

 

[mwood30]

That single verse I cited destroys the picture you paint. If you are familiar with the Bible you would know there are a multitude of verses that show God hates numerous things from pride to greed to sexual immorality and these are cited over and over again as things that those who do them will not inherit the kingdom of God.



We are not ripping you apart for being polite, we are challenging the error in your version of the truth.

You are misreading the very simple sentence structure of 1 Corinthians 6:9 because you have been taught to do so. Let me explain.

Consider this sentence: I go crazy for women: blondes, brunettes, and red heads.

Now answer me this: Do I go crazy for blonde dudes? Brunette dudes? Red headed dudes?

No way! And you know it from the sentence. I'm giving a list which is based upon my larger statement. It's that easy. So it is with 1 Corinthians 6:9.

No person who treats others unjustly will inherit the kingdom of God: A, B, C, D, E.

Is the verse referring to all of A? Only if you think I'm attracted to blonde dudes! You've been misreading the passage and overlooking the message. Every single person on that list was the epitome of unjust treatment of others in 1st century Corinth.

Maybe there are other verses that contradict what I teach, but this isn't one of them in the Greek. In fact, it's the opposite. It teaches exactly what I'm saying.