• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured mainline churches and evangelicals

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by FireDragon76, Dec 19, 2017.

  1. GingerBeer

    GingerBeer Cool and refreshing with a kick!

    +1,217
    Australia
    Christian
    Private
    I'll give Jehovah's witnesses the win in that survey. 7 percent Like Republicans but likely don't vote, 18 percent like Democrats but likely don't vote and 75 percent don't care about Republicans or Democrats. That's a good show.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  2. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,566
    United States
    Other Religion
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat
    I was using the term in the sense church historians would use it, like this guy:



    This movement is related to what you were talking about, but it's features were broader than simply a firm orthodoxy. Lots of mainline Christians didn't object to the Fundamentalists orthodoxy so much as their polemical style.

    If we knew absolute truth, we'ld be omniscient.

    I'm not into the Emergent Church stuff, neither are most people I know in the mainline. They seem to be ex-evangelicals who caught a whiff of liberal and post-liberal theology and tried to incorporate it into their religion without also taking other aspects of mainline religion seriously, such as what Marius pointed out, our confessionalism.

    BTW, I do think alot of those points you mentioned in the above are perfectly valid (I do think appreciating art is potentially spiritual, and nothing in Lutheranism contradicts that. Luther loved art and considered it almost sacramental). But I think Emergents are missing a big picture of what it means to actually be a disciple. Alot of it is the unsexy little stuff of showing up to an old church that isn't exactly hip or as relevant as you think it should be because that is where God has called you to be. And like many evangelicals and fundamentalists, they are still polemical, only they are reacting to anything that resembles conservative religion, in all forms.

    I notice in Brian McLaren's books, such as Generous Orthodoxy, he never talks about Lutheranism. He grew up in a Plymouth Brethren church, and I suspect he reacts to anything that looks remotely like fundamentalism. Much as I said above about polemicism applies here.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  3. hedrick

    hedrick Senior Veteran Supporter

    +4,722
    Presbyterian
    Single
    There is a difference between obedience and purity. Purity is an achievement. It's focused on us. Obedience focuses on Jesus. The problem with purity is that it leads to a checklist morality, where people are worried about even things that are arguably not a problem for Jesus, because any failure makes them impure. You see this in Christian Advice all the time. The purity focus leads people to spend all their time trying to get rid of supposed sins. As they fail they get more and more concerned, and their focus gets more and more on themselves.

    "Do you thank the slave for doing what was commanded? So you also, when you have done all that you were ordered to do, say, ‘We are worthless slaves; we have done only what we ought to have done!’ ” (Luke 17:9-10, NRSV) Not "we've achieved moral purity." See also the parable of the sheep and goats. The sheep didn't even know they were doing something meritorious. I don't think that's just a throw-away detail.

    Obviously Jesus had plenty to say about behavior. But it was all things that matter to others. He didn't talk about purity at all, except Mat 5:8, which isn't quite moral purity. He used holy of the Holy Spirit, but not of people except the "holy prophets." He didn't even use the term sin very much, except in forgiveness of sins. Basically he avoided anything that would lead people to the personal purity approach. That was very specifically the Pharisees' ideal.

    This doesn't mean that he didn't care about how we act. But I think when we do things because they matter we get different results than when we do things to be pure or sinless.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  4. hedrick

    hedrick Senior Veteran Supporter

    +4,722
    Presbyterian
    Single
    The term "fundamentalist" came from a series of books called "The Fundamentals." It covered many of the basics of Christian theology from a conservative viewpoint, but also contained polemical articles on a variety of contested topics. Here's a list of the contents: The Fundamentals - Wikipedia.
    The list of 5 is a summary of the things that proved most controversial, but not their whole theology. There may, of course, be fundamentalists who actually do have a simplified theology. But I think the term actually means someone who holds traditional Protestant theology, and it tends to be used for those who are aggressively polemical towards others.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  5. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,566
    United States
    Other Religion
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat

    You are misunderstanding the point Jesus is actually making . He was revealing the sin in the rich man's heart. This is consistent with what we call the Second Use of the Law. The law does not justify us or make us holy, it points out our sinfulness.

    What Jesus is saying is more like the opposite of what you think he's saying. He goes on to explain that even though salvation with man is impossible, it is possible for God. That's why as he goes along, he starts talking more about his secret mission, to confront the Jewish elders and Roman authorities and to die on the Cross. Because he knows he's going to have to confront sin and evil, masked behind religious hypocrisy and political pragmatism, personally, because these things are simply too great for mortal man to deal with.

    So Jesus didn't come to be a moralist and help us to live immaculate lives with a little moral correction, he came to be our Savior, to take us to a complete new, grace-filled way to live, where we imitate Christ despite our sinfulness.

    Jesus is not condemning the woman at all, but showing compassion for her because he knows she has gone to the well alone, in the middle of the hot day, because she is afraid of ridicule and shame. Jesus is offering her validation as a human being, despite her shame. That's why she goes away so happy, she's seen the Messiah and he affirms her as a person capable of worshiping God, even though the other women in town have probably been talking about her behind her back for years.


    I have a book for you to read if you really want to understand anything about my religion, it is called Reading the Bible with Martin Luther, by Timothy Wengert.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  6. Athanasius377

    Athanasius377 Is a little right of Atilla the Hun Supporter

    834
    +945
    United States
    Lutheran
    Married
    US-Constitution
    There is a lot of silliness that happens on this forum. I think that some Evangelicals popularly defined have a hard time distinguishing what a national church body proclaims and what that church body looks like on an average Sunday. Back when I was a gigging musician I would wind up playing three to four gigs every Christmas and Easter days to say nothing of Advent or Lent. In those days I would be hired by mainline churches who theology nationally was liberal (theologically that is) but at the parish level was very conservative. The local ELCA congregations I was hired by were the most diverse while the Episcopalian parishes were the most reliably liberal.
     
  7. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,566
    United States
    Other Religion
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat
    I really struggled early on with this, as a Lutheran. I had been beaten down in so many other churches obsessed with purity I had trouble understanding when my pastor told me I was a disciple of Jesus. I didn't want to believe it. I was imperfect and sinful, how could I be a disciple? As I matured as a Lutheran, I realized it was safe to acknowledge that I was a disciple. Being a disciple doesn't mean you are pure, it means Jesus teachings have an impact of some kind on your life.

    And all of this is OK, it was just a process of growth. We Lutherans like to place Jesus as being Savior, before being our Lord. We don't put the cart before the horse. We talk about Jesus now days as being our "servant Lord", which is sort of the combination of both themes.

    And I realize also, I was a disciple of Jesus at a very young age. We righthly place infant baptism as the beginning of discipleship, Lutherans and Methodists alike. Because I remember even as a young kid around six, I was learning what love meant in my Methodist church. It meant gentleness, self-control, being thoughtful of others. That's a completely different perspective from evangelicalism that often intellectualizes what faith and discipleship means, so that discipleship only really starts when you are a "grown up".

    By contrast, evangelical religion of the "4 spiritually laws" variety swooped in as a teenager and told me that God was in fact angry with me as a sinner and I needed to accept Jesus to be right with God, and to stop sinning and be perfect. It sort of threw a wrench into the works. It made me oblivious to the fact I was already a disciple of Jesus and that I just needed to stick with mainline religion and focus on the vocation God had called me to.

    I'm thankful during this vulnerable period in my life I had somebody like a chaplain to talk to, we were living in England on a military base and my religion during this period was spotty. My dad insisted I go to talk to the local base chaplancy, troubled by my newfound fundamentalism. He knew of a chapain on base, she was a Presbyterian minister in the PC-USA, but serving in the Air Force as a major.

    She gave me a book about Old Testament higher criticism and challenged my newfound fundamentalism, and encouraged me to be open-minded and thoughtful in my approach to the Christian faith. I didn't take her completely seriously, for many reasons (fundamentalism has a powerful grip on ones mind), but at least her influence was there in my life, a foil to a toxic religion mindset. She also encouraged me to attend services at the chapel and I did so, and I gave her a grudging respect as a minister (she was a better preacher than many of the Methodists I have encountered), even if I didn't completely understand where she was comming from, I could recognize that she was somebody that had a certain amount of authority.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  8. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single

    Or place your faith in the infallibly declared infallible magisterium, whereby you can know what is of God for sure and what it means, and without which you cannot. Those common folk who professed to know of a truth that someone was of God, and held writings likewise to be so before there was a elitist church which presumed their
    infallible magisterium was essential for this, must have thought they really were little popes!
    Well, that sums up liberal "Christianity" quite well.

    God pegged this guys 2k years ago:

    For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. (Jude 4)

    Yes, dogmatism in essentials and moral absolutes is anathema to liberals, as is rejection due to convictions. Except that they are dogmatic about there being no absolutes.
    The aversion to doctrine and advocacy of good works is indeed contradictory, while the idea is to avoid persecution by taking a stand for basic morality such as condemns fornication, by jumping on the bandwagon of moral molehill movements such as being against wearing fur while celebrating women dressing as prostitutes, if dressing at all.
    From the Sinsinawa Dominican nuns:

    A Circle of Drums This workshop is a high-energy, hands-on presentation emphasizing collaborative, creative individual expression while also exhibiting the benefits of synergetic group dynamics. Bill uses an ensemble of beautiful drums and percussion instruments from around the world to facilitate a meaningful team-building experience that celebrates the expansive nature of human potential and the ecstatic response to group rhythm-making. It is our hope that everyone who participates in the experience will enjoy a powerful body/mind/spirit encounter that will last a lifetime! - https://www.sinsinawa.org/MoundCenter/RetreatDetail.cfm?num=536
    .
    But not art like this:[​IMG]

    - "The Bridge" The Friends of Israel - The Bridge (1983 O/N)

    More like what they do not believe, with pathos replacing ethos, except that of politically correct societal morality that protests against starving (falsely) polar bears while promoting the right to murder infants.
    Thanks.
     
  9. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,566
    United States
    Other Religion
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat
    @PeaceByJesus , some of us take costly stands for what we believe in. We don't see ourselves as trying to avoid persecution. Your characterization of mainline Christianity is just narrow, bigoted, and wrong.

    An example of a costly stance for us was our position on civil rights in the 60's and 70's. That was not popular with the general public, and in some cases cost us membership.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  10. RDKirk

    RDKirk Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner Supporter

    +10,978
    Christian
    Married
    In many cases, it's an attitude born of the history of the denomination from back when people were severely opressed for refusing to make that public affirmation--despite the fact that their actual statement of belief was hardly different from the creed.
     
  11. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    Which is simply another example of specious liberal dichotomies. You cannot be obedient to i Christ without seeking to attain moral purity, to be as He is in this world, which disallows moral impurity as acceptable or moral purity as marginal.

    Certainly it is not enough to abstain from outward sins such as stealing, fornication, etc. while having a proud stern heartless attitude toward those in need, and sins of the heart such as conceit, a calculating malicious deceitful heart are worse sins than having a drinking problem, but moral purity and disciplining such things as indolence is not to be minimized or opposed to such things as having helping the needy, but the two are to go together, hating moral disobedience and impurity as regards such things a fornication (in ourselves first), while having "compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. (Hebrews 5:2)

    Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. (Jude 21-23)
    And just where would they get that idea? Surely not per the specious red-letter heremenuetic:
    For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man. (Mark 7:21-23)


    Quite a check list.
    The problem is not purity focus but being focused more on the sin that must be dealt with than on Christ who is the solution.

    Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:1-2)
    .
    No, it is not a a throw-away detail any more than other words of the Lord such as "Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy." (Revelation 3:4)

    What you are engaging in is the typical liberal recourse to false dichotomy, implicitly contrasting social action of compassion with the focus on moral purity, and the condemnation of moral sins of the flesh, which is a false balance, and which the Lord hates, (Proverbs 11:1) which extends beyond the physical.

    One could just as as well argue that Jesus did not affectionately behold and love the rich young ruler because he engaged in humanitarian work, but because he kept "the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. (Mark 10:19-21) But because he trusted in riches (Mark 10:24) "Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. (Matthew 19:21)

    Thus rather than one being marginalized both are necessary, and likewise James says, Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world. (James 1:27)
    That is absurd, for as told to your comrade, besides resorting to the spurious "red-letter" hermenuetic, you ignore most of the other texts such as condemn personal moral impurity, including where the Lord clearly condemns adulteries, fornications, lasciviousness, blasphemy etc.
    Are you serious? Once again besides resorting to the spurious (and it is indeed) "red-letter" hermenuetic, you ignore that what he condemned the Pharisees for was merely ritual purity, while reproving them for their fornication (via divorce) implicit in murder of prophets which preached moral purity in heart and in life, and being greedy and filthy inside:

    Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. (Matthew 23:26-28)

    Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. (Matthew 23:31)

    Moreover, since the gospels mainly deal with the sins of the scribes and Pharisees which were as described, then thus we most often see them dealt with, yet the Lord also emphasized how serious immorality was in regards to actions, thus recommending the cutting off of body parts to avoid doing these, if that would actually do it
    You are restricting moral purity to that which is merely for show as contrasted with social service, yet the Lord clearly condemned basic moral sins such as stealing, fornication, etc. and whose life was that of moral purity from such, as well as having compassion toward those in needs, and the two are to go together.

    As are the gospels with the rest of the NT, all of which writings were inspired by the same Spirit of Christ who authored the gospels, and with the latter being interpretative of the former, as the gospels themselves are of the OT. Only by considering the whole counsel of God can one understand what Godliness requires.

    And which includes is the emphasis upon doctrine and priority of salvation of the soul, not priority of the physical (though that may be most urgent, not not most important), yet with the same love means helping with both, and doctrinal Paul as a follower of Christ whom we are to follow, showed both.

    And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do. (Galatians 2:9-10)
     
  12. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single

    Why is your misrepresenting what the Lord taught obvious to you?! Besides resorting to the spurious "red-letter" hermenuetic, you ignore most of the other texts such as condemn personal moral impurity, including where the Lord clearly condemns adulteries, fornications, lasciviousness, blasphemy etc. and engage in a false dichotomy here in seeking to negate to intolerable idea that the Lord upholds person moral purity as important.

    Thus the fact that the Lord was revealing the sin in the rich man's heart by invoking the Law testifies to His affirmation of it as holy, just and good, and it is in the light of this that the sinner sees his need for salvation. This is not a "Second Use of the Law" but is actually a primary use, for (if you dared reads the rest of the word of Christ) the Law provides "knowledge and of the truth" (Romans 2:20), and thus "by the law is the knowledge of sin" (Romans 3:20) "I had not known sin, but by the law" (Romans 7:7) "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good" (Romans 7:12) but unable to save, yet Christians are to fulfill the righteousness of the law by not walking not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:4)

    The fact here is that the Lord invokes the Law as the standard, which Christ is more supremely since He kept it fully in its intent, which mean keeping the moral law in the letter as well. One act of lust by the Lord, if that were possible, would have eliminated Him from being the Savior, and He advises (if perhaps hyperbolic) amputating appendages if they cause you to sin in order to escape unquenchable Hell-fire.

    That is how important moral purity was and is to the Lord. And here He does not offer a lower standard, or minimize moral purity, but emphasizes it in making the failure in that regard as meaning one is in need of salvation.

    As for the Lord's "secret mission," because "he's going to have to confront sin and evil, masked behind religious hypocrisy and political pragmatism," we are in chapter 19, and by now the Lord has already been doing the above, and rather than your false dichotomy, the Lord's condemnation of these leaders is consistent with and flows from His invocation of the Law as the standard. These leaders were guilty of what the Law condemns, both in sins of the flesh and of the heart, and thus they needed salvation as did the rich young ruler.

    And which salvation does not have as its purpose a lower standard, but as those who are given, on Christ's account by faith, the status which they could not attain under the Law, as Paul explains, they are called, enabled and motivated to be in this world as Christ was, fulfilling the full righteousness of the Law, both the letter of the moral Law and its spirit, as He did.

    Are you serious???!!! This is simply one more of your false dichotomies, contrasting following Christ with moral purity. How can one imitate Christ without seeking to live immaculate lives versus sinfulness? The two are not opposed, and Christ did not come to help us to live immaculate lives with just a little moral correction, but came as Lord and Savior to save us because of our sinfulness and as a result to seek to be in this world as He was, (1 John 4:17) which in no way was that of moral impurity.

    What?! Rather than salvation from her sins, her fornicating that the Lord purposely brought up being just one of them, "Jesus is offering her validation as a human being ...That's why she goes away so happy...as a person capable of worshiping God?"
    Thus is so much typical liberal tripe. The Lord's purpose her was not that of validating her as a human being capable of worshiping God, but instead He validated her a candidate for the salvation she desperately needed as a audacious fornicating sinner, who could not worship God, and was thus looking for fulfillment in the physical realm versus the spiritual, that being Christ (and which contrast is a constant theme in John). And the same command given to the women caught in adultery in John 8 ("Go, and sin no more," meaning practice in John) is implicit here in the Lord revealing that He knew she had 5 husbands, and cohabitation with her present one was not marriage.


    Why would I be interested in reading more of your grievous absurdities? I certainly do not claim to live morally perfect in heart or all deeds, but i cannot lower the standard i am to seek to attain.

    Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:2-4)

    As said, certainly it is not enough to abstain from outward sins such as stealing, fornication, etc. while having a proud stern heartless attitude toward those in need,
    but the two are to go together, "of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh." (Jude 21-23)

    No wonder liberals pick and choose from the gospels and marginalize much of the rest.
     
  13. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    No, not caring about who the captain will be on a ship full of souls while belonging to a mind-control lying cult is not a good show, nor is your affirmation of it. You may not vote out of disgust, but you must care.
     
  14. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    And just what "4 spiritually laws" variety says that you must stop sinning and be actually perfect (not simply be imputation) to be saved? Why resort to misrepresentation?
    .
    That was trouble right there.
    Meaning she subscribed to the discredited Documentary Hypothesis' and or otherwise divested the OT of the level of authority that the Lord and NT church ascribed to it.
    She has no authority over Scripture, and i am sorry she seduced you with her liberal sophism which is being continually exposed here, by the grace of God.

    Thank you for your service to the country though.
     
  15. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,566
    United States
    Other Religion
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat
    @PeaceByJesus What you call liberal tripe, is exactly what our vicar preached just a few months ago, more or less. I can remember the sermon vividly. And he's no liberal weanie. He's a sincere servant of Jesus. He's since moved on to serving as pastor in a small Pennsylvania town. They are getting a great pastor, even if we lost a great assistant pastor.

    BTW, my Orthodox priest gave a similar sermon years ago I remember, about the woman at the well (Photini or Svetlana is her name in the EO world). He also tried to emphasize that Jesus was not being judgmental, but compassionate. So I think your interpretation of the passage is needlessly harsh and makes Jesus look cruel.

    You know, Jesus had stern warnings for blasphemy against his work. All we see ourselves doing is trying not to shut out people who are wanting to come into the Kingdom and to find rest in the Lord. That is consistent with what Jesus preached, that his yoke is easy and his burden light. You would pile burdens upon the weak... that's not Jesus' way.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  16. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    Which is another contradiction. You may be preaching according to your faith but the faith of the NT church ordained only men, Christ Himself only choosing males as apostles, reflective of the positional distinctions btwn genders, and required them to met a holy standard.

    Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. (1 Corinthians 11:2-3)

    Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. (1 Timothy 2:11-14)

    A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. (1 Timothy 3:2-7)

    For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. (Titus 1:5-6)
    The church at Corinth also had your problem as were some others who were not purity-focused, and thus were told,

    But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. (1 Corinthians 5:11-13)


    But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. (Revelation 2:14-16)

    Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works. (Revelation 2:20-23)


    I myself need to be more purity-focused, esp. in heart, setting my affections on things above:

    Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory. Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them. But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: (Colossians 3:2-10)

    No wonder liberals marginalize such.

    And in more detail (ouch):

    Traits of the Self-Life

    The following are some of the features and manifestations of the self-life. The Spirit alone can interpret and apply this to your individual case. As you read, examine yourself as if in the immediate presence of God. Are you ever conscious of:
    • A secret spirit of pride, an exalted feeling, in view of your success or position; (Daniel 4:30) because of your good training and appearance; because of your natural gifts and abilities. An important, independent spirit. (1Sam. 2:3; Prov. 16:16; Mk. 14:29-31) Stiffness and preciseness? (Mt. 23:34)
    • Love of human praise; a secret fondness to be noticed; love of supremacy; (Mt. 6:5) drawing attention to self in conversation; a swelling out of self when you have had a free time in speaking or praying? (Lk. 22:24; Acts 8:9-24; 3Jn 1:9)
    • The stirrings of anger or impatience, which, worst of all, you call nervousness or holy indignation; a touchy, sensitive spirit; a disposition to resent and retaliate when reproved or contradicted; a desire to throw sharp, heated flings at another? (1Sam. 8:7-11; Prov. 18:14)
    • Self-will; a stubborn unteachable spirit; (Prov. 29:1; 2Chrn. 36:16; Jer. 44:16-19) an arguing, talkative spirit; (Prov. 21:19; 26:2; Rm. 2:8) harsh, sarcastic expressions; (Ps. 94:4; Col. 4:6) and unyielding, headstrong disposition; (2Chrn. 10:10) a driving, commanding spirit; a disposition to criticize and pick flaws when set aside and unnoticed; a peevish, fretful spirit; a disposition that loves to [or must] be coaxed and humoured? (1Sam. 18:8; 20:29-34)
    • Carnal fear; a man-fearing spirit; (Mt. 10:28; Rv. 21:8) a shrinking from reproach and duty; (Heb. 10:38,39) reasoning around your cross; (Lk. 14:33) a shrinking from doing your whole duty by those of wealth or position; a fearfulness that someone will get out of the spirit and thus offend and drive some prominent person away; a compromising spirit?(James 2:1-4; Gal. 2:11-13)
    • A resentful jealous disposition; a secret spirit of envy shut up in your heart; an unpleasant sensation in view of the great prosperity and success of another; (1 Samuel 18:6-9) a disposition to speak of the faults and failings, rather than the gifts and virtues of those more talented and appreciated than yourself? (2 Samuel 16:5-8; Ps. 109:17,18)
    • Lustful stirrings; unholy actions; undue inclinations and unholy familiarity towards those of the opposite sex; wandering eyes? (Prov. 6:25; Colossians 3:5)
    • A dishonest, deceitful disposition; the evading and covering of the truth; the covering up of your real faults; (Prov. 12:20; 26:26; 28:13) the leaving of a better impression of yourself than is strictly true; false humility; exaggeration; straining the truth?(Mt. 7:15; Lk. 11:39)
    • Unbelief; a spirit of discouragement in times of pressure and opposition; lack of quietness and confidence in God; lack of faith and trust in God; (Heb. 3:12) a disposition to worry and complain in the midst of pain, poverty, or at the dispensations of Divine Providence; (Job 31) an over-anxious feeling whether everything will come out all right? (Job 3)
    • Formality and deadness; lack of concern for lost souls; dryness and indifference; lack of power with God? (Rv. 3:17)
    • Selfishness; love of ease; love of money? (Ezek. 16:49)
     
  17. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    It means not ritual purity, but such things as the Lord said defiled on in Mark 7:21-23.

    And there shall in no wise enter into it [the Holy City] any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life. (Revelation 21:27)
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  18. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    Details or is ambiguity a strength?
     
  19. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,566
    United States
    Other Religion
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat
    This is dubious theology, and quite judgmental and harsh. You are essentially saying that a person struggling over sin is somehow lacking faith, that if only they really believed, somehow they would overcome sin. Yet real Christians do sin, all the time.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2017
  20. PeaceByJesus

    PeaceByJesus Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior

    +2,046
    Christian
    Single
    Actually before this Christian evangelicals were at the forefront of the movement in the West. with such primary men whom we highly esteem such as William Wilberforce who wrote in his diary when he was 28 that, "God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the Slave Trade and Reformation of Morals. The famous English preacher Charles Spurgeon had some of his sermons burned in America due to his censure of slavery, calling it "the foulest blot" and which "may have to be washed out in blood."[93] Methodist founder John Wesley denounced human bondage as "the sum of all villainies," and detailed its abuses.[94] In Georgia, primitive Methodists united with brethren elsewhere in condemning slavery.

    Many evangelical leaders in the United States such as Presbyterian Charles Finney and Theodore Weld, and women such as Harriet Beecher Stowe (daughter of abolitionist Lyman Beecher) and Sojourner Truth motivated hearers to support abolition. Finney preached that slavery was a moral sin, and so supported its elimination. "I had made up my mind on the question of slavery, and was exceedingly anxious to arouse public attention to the subject. In my prayers and preaching, I so often alluded to slavery, and denounced it.[95] Repentance from slavery was required of souls, once enlightened of the subject, while continued support of the system incurred "the greatest guilt upon them.[96] [not to exclude the Quakers who in particular had a profound influence.]

    However, it is true that Southern white evangelicals overall resisted the threat of changing of the status quo of their society, with those who advocated desegregation were a minority, though "when Graham determined in 1952-53 that he could no longer preach the Gospel to segregated meetings because that would represent a betrayal of the Gospel itself, younger southern Presbyterian conservatives nodded their heads in agreement."

    In contrast, it was mainly those from the Episcopal, Presbyterian (UPCUSA), Unitarian, Disciples of Christ and Methodist faiths who acted as evangelicals, who advocated a faith which worships Christ, who "hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation" (Revelation 5:9) but who failed to apply it Scripturally. (Meanwhile 80% of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act, versus less than 70% of Democrats, mainly determined by geography).

    However, it is natural for liberals to preach liberty, since by nature they oppose restraints. And who proceeded to "enslave" blacks with the destructive demonic victim-entitlement mentality, which is responsible for the increasing degradation of the American black family and culture far more than any actual discrimination.

    Meanwhile, though liberals (though not alone) are adept at spending the money of others who are compelled to give it, what faith class to do you think is providing the most private-funded humanitarian aid to the needy (a relative term, but in 3rd word sense)?
     
Loading...