Liberal Christians

[lismore]

In like manner is there one that specifically supports it?

I dont think there is a scripture one way or the other. But as we've got one and it works really well, what would you have me to do?

 

[christdiedforus]

What all of Gods children do, follow Him. There is all sorts of insanity around us every day that is not part of God or His plan for us. We don't have to participate in it, approve of it, or revel in it. In fact we are called to be apart from the world while we are in the world, be light as it were and influence the world for God and His kingdom. While we are here I don't know that there is much else we can do. Of course we, as individuals, should help people out every chance we can.

I found this a few moments ago. I'm not sure if you might be interested in looking at this but I thought that was very interesting.

The Bible mandates free market capitalism. It is anti-socialist. The proof is here: 10,000 pages of exposition, verse by verse. Free.

 

[lismore]

What all of Gods children do, follow Him.

In practical terms though, in reference to the Welfare state, what does that mean?

Thanks for the link BTW.

 

[christdiedforus]

Well to put it as Mr. Prager would, which makes sense to me, the bigger the government the smaller the individual. God has given each of us individual talents and when we are not put in the right circumstances those talents may never be shown to us or others. Being coddled and never tried stifles individual development in many respects, as Dennis indicated in his article. If people feel the need to be protected to the point that much of their personality/talents never gets the opportunity to show itself then I guess that is ok as long as they don't have a negative impact on others. For me and many others this way of living is unacceptable, not to mention that those who choose to live beyond the nanny state ultimately become penalized by that same state which seeks to coddle as many as will allow it. This is just not right yet it happens. No one can live anothers life so we must each make a choice about how we want to exist on this earth. The main concern I have is in that choice we do not force others to conform to our ideals. Everyone should have a choice and in the socialist environment much if not all choice is taken away from the individual and given to a small group, called government.

 

[David Brider]

There are some passages that like 'thou shalt not covet, thou shalt not steal, put not your trust in princes (ie government) nor in the son of man in whom there is no help, a man shall not lay with a man as with a woman it is an abomination' that some professing Christians somehow manage to 'interpret' to mean a government controlled welfare state is the way we should care for the poor or that God is fine with gay marriage.

I don't think it's necessarily a way we should care for the poor, so much as a way we can care for the poor. What the commandments against stealing and covetousness have to do with that is something that you'll have to explain. As for your idea that "put not your trust in princes" relates to government, I think that may be a case of you adhering to what you wish God said as opposed to what he actually said. Paul tells us "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God," and given that the governments in the UK and the US are a lot better than the one in Rome in Paul's time, I think we can feel a lot better submitting ourselves to the governing authorities than people to whom Paul was writing could.

As for same-sex marriage, given that the government (in the UK at least, not 100% sure how it works in the US) is responsible for legislating marriage, then it's up to them whether or not to okay same-sex marriage. It's got nothing to do "a man shall not lay with a man as with a woman," 'cos even if that verse is specifically referring to sex (contextually unlikely), the reality is that if two people want to have sex together they will, regardless of whether or not they're married.

David.

 

[David Brider]

Well to put it as Mr. Prager would, which makes sense to me, the bigger the government the smaller the individual. God has given each of us individual talents and when we are not put in the right circumstances those talents may never be shown to us or others. Being coddled and never tried stifles individual development in many respects, as Dennis indicated in his article. If people feel the need to be protected to the point that much of their personality/talents never gets the opportunity to show itself then I guess that is ok as long as they don't have a negative impact on others. For me and many others this way of living is unacceptable, not to mention that those who choose to live beyond the nanny state ultimately become penalized by that same state which seeks to coddle as many as will allow it. This is just not right yet it happens. No one can live anothers life so we must each make a choice about how we want to exist on this earth. The main concern I have is in that choice we do not force others to conform to our ideals. Everyone should have a choice and in the socialist environment much if not all choice is taken away from the individual and given to a small group, called government.

Well, y'know, you'd probably think of the government in the UK as being "big" and the environment as being "socialist", but honestly, I don't feel that my individual development has suffered, or that my personality or talents have been stifled. I get on with my life, and I'm reasonably happy in my life (and any unhappiness in my life has little to do with the government).

I guess, to a certain extent, it's what you're used to. I can't imagine living in a society in which the government doesn't make some sort of provision for those who are unable to work or unable to find work, and in which the NHS doesn't exist to freely, or at least very cheaply, provide for people's health needs. For a government to provide those things may not be specifically Christian, but for a government not to provide those things seems rather callous and uncaring.

David.

 

[ToBeInChrist]

We shouldn't be callous or mean-spirited or rebellious, but we shouldn't be spendthrifts or trust in princes, either.

Re: marriage regulation, in a representative government, the people actually have a role in governing and in making legislation, etc., so citizens may certainly campaign to change the policy without being rebellious at heart, especially since in ancient times when the people did not have such a role in government, prophets rightly spoke against immorality, just as John the Baptist spoke against Herod's unlawful marriage to his brother's wife. Prophetic criticism, or proclaiming that there should be a change of policy, is different than not being submissive to authority, or advocating rebellion.

 

[BondiHarry]

I don't think it's necessarily a way we should care for the poor, so much as a way we can care for the poor. What the commandments against stealing and covetousness have to do with that is something that you'll have to explain.

It should be readily apparent what 'thou shalt not covet' and 'thou shalt not steal' have to do with forceably taking the bread of one man's labor to give to another man. This is ELEMENTARY David.

As for your idea that "put not your trust in princes" relates to government, I think that may be a case of you adhering to what you wish God said as opposed to what he actually said.

I've actually done an in depth study of God's commands regarding governmment, kings and princes and yes, God gives government very little responsiblity, the two primary things being wielding the sword against the evil doers and ensuring justice is done (as God defines it, not as men have redefined it).

Paul tells us "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God," and given that the governments in the UK and the US are a lot better than the one in Rome in Paul's time, I think we can feel a lot better submitting ourselves to the governing authorities than people to whom Paul was writing could.

And God's throne for men is established in righteousness and those He appoints to lead answer to Him for their handling of the duties He gives them. Yes, as Christians we submit to the governing authorities and their laws (unless they require that we do something that would cause us to disobey God, in which case do NOT obey them). Obviously a great many kings and princes have utterly ignored their duties to God (Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin to name just a few) and used their positions of power for their own purposes.

As for same-sex marriage, given that the government (in the UK at least, not 100% sure how it works in the US) is responsible for legislating marriage

In the U.S. the Federal government has no Constitutional authority to involve itself in defining marriage so such determinations should be left to the states.

then it's up to them whether or not to okay same-sex marriage.

No government, having been instituted by God and answering to Him, can properly legalize 'gay marriage' when God has made marriage between a man and a woman. Some governments are of course 'legalizing' gay marriage though I don't see what that gains same sex couples. Government recognition of their unions will avail them nothing when they appear before Jesus to answer to Him for their disobedience.

It's got nothing to do "a man shall not lay with a man as with a woman," 'cos even if that verse is specifically referring to sex (contextually unlikely)

The Bible clearly condemns same sex sexual relations in both the OT and NT. That you think it is 'contextually unlikely' I find baffling considering that is the clear meaning of all scripture that addresses same sex relations.

the reality is that if two people want to have sex together they will, regardless of whether or not they're married.

David.

That is one of the marvelous aspects of salvation through Jesus. God will change us so we don't remain subject to the domination of the lusts of the flesh such as fornication or coveting the property of our neighbor etc. That so many people do choose the lusts of the flesh over the holiness that God calls us to simply reveals how fallen we are.

David, I hope you understand that God will typically not stop people who are determined to ruin themselves. He has called us to Him but those who don't want Him will be left to the misery their sins bring them and His ultimate judgment, wrath and destruction of them. That this is true one just needs to look at modern society with its rampant fornication, gays pairing off, murder, abortion, theft and so forth. God doesn't warn us about sin to keep us from having joy or pleasure in our lives, He warns us about sin because it does great harm to us in this life and will separate us from Him in the next.

 

[christdiedforus]

I used to be, im athiest now

Then, sadly, you never were.

 

[Satt]

I hope all of you vote this next election.

 

[RobinsonCA]

Raises hand!!!

 

[Raiyuu]

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....

I agree with you OP so much!! It took me forever to find a conservative church in my area. The liberal churches makes me feel so starved and empty :s

 

[Norah63]

Well Softly, you are just seeing the fruit of seeds that came from the humanistic teaching
In the school system. Yes it is a sad day for America. when mans mind trys to replace
Gods ways, it always leads down hill.
However there are a lot of conservatives out here. Scattered maybe, but here anyway.
Keep the faith, the best is yet to be!

 

[Leap]

Another one here.

I often look at the way the churches are being infested with liberalism and wonder what on earth is going on. It seems as if every month another one declares "gay marriage" to be ok, or that divorce should be easy, or runs its services like a nightclub gig.

 

[IisJustMe]

You folks hungering for a Bible-preaching and believing church with conservative moral values should check out a good old-fashioned Southern Baptist Church. The stereotype of stiff-necked, unfriendly legalists is so far out of the realm of reality as to beg offense at it. We're friendly, outgoing, contemporary in our worship and more than willing to open our arms to people of all walks of life and doctrinal upbringings.

Check us out. We're nice people.

 

[tankerG]

I'm raising my hand on this one!

And, with "liberal Christians", I think James 1:8
"A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways." Is it any wonder why they are all messed up?

 

[WalksWithChrist]

I'm raising my hand on this one!

And, with "liberal Christians", I think James 1:8
"A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways." Is it any wonder why they are all messed up?

Not a very Christian thing to say, is it? No one should use the Bible to insult a whole group of people.

 

[BondiHarry]

Not a very Christian thing to say, is it? No one should use the Bible to insult a whole group of people.

Christ had no problem using harsh and insulting language to describe the religionists of His day (the Pharisees) who had God on their lips but the devil in their hearts. Den of thieves, brood of adders, white washed tombs with dead men's bones ... and of course Matthew 23:15 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves." If Jesus had His ministry today He would have a LOT to say about the slaughter of unborn children, the fraud of gay marriage and the pretense that stealing the bread of another man's labor to help the poor is 'charity'.

 

[WalksWithChrist]

Christ had no problem using harsh and insulting language to describe the religionists of His day (the Pharisees) who had God on their lips but the devil in their hearts. Den of thieves, brood of adders, white washed tombs with dead men's bones ... and of course Matthew 23:15 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves." If Jesus had His ministry today He would have a LOT to say about the slaughter of unborn children, the fraud of gay marriage and the pretense that stealing the bread of another man's labor to help the poor is 'charity'.

I hear that excuse a lot. And I'm sure Jesus wasn't giggling when he did admonish people.

 

[A New Dawn]

Christ had no problem using harsh and insulting language to describe the religionists of His day (the Pharisees) who had God on their lips but the devil in their hearts. Den of thieves, brood of adders, white washed tombs with dead men's bones ... and of course Matthew 23:15 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves." If Jesus had His ministry today He would have a LOT to say about the slaughter of unborn children, the fraud of gay marriage and the pretense that stealing the bread of another man's labor to help the poor is 'charity'.

Yeah, I have heard that excuse before, too, and it is just that, an excuse. We are not Christ, we don't know what is in another's heart, and Christ told us to love one another as he loves us (which we can only approximate, but even He did not react violently except for when he threw the moneychangers out of the Temple).