To be clear, I don't consider the Bible to be a "personal experience." It's revelation intended for all mankind. BTW, it seems to me that a lot of what you are wondering about is covered in our wiki statement and perhaps it would help everyone if you took a look at that and then asked for clarifications, etc. based upon it. Just a thought and not intended to inhibit any inquiries.
I looked at your wiki,but talking to people,everyone seems to view the conservative christianity as something else,so I am looking what is the same,
and so far,I see that literal bible is not a conservative requirement ,but the bible is viewed as without any errors,and that conservative lifestyle is a requirement.
The group who pointed the divide out to me,were staff,who are more extreme conservatives ,literal bible,YEC types.
The latter is, I think, a defining attribute of conservative Christians. Rights come from God, not man, not the state. Problems should be addressed closest to the source and by the family, the church, the community, the local government and last of all by the Federal government, the EU or a similiar body. Catholics have their
principle of subsidiarity; Protestants have their Federalism and state's rights. When conservative Christians lobby government, it is often to stop something being done, not to seek this program or that.
I agree with conservative lifestyle, family being the foundation.
I dislike nanny/welfare state, destroying all the values, families and creating an underclass of people dependant on hand outs from the state. I dislike that state dictates what is taught in schools, political correctness, taking one freedom after another... whilst increasing taxes and government size... many other issues... this is not a place to talk about it really.
I guess I see now that what I viewed as something separate-conservative political and social view, is actually something defining a conservative christianity,
I thought this was based only on spiritual views,but I see the conection now.
Every liberal I have encountered has done this. Therefore, this is the experience I spoke out of. But since picking and choosing is so common, I would be highly surprised if some of these liberals if not all of them didn't pick and choose.
I guess what you see as picking and chosing,I see as
learning,evaluating,an atempt to get the information in the bible relevant to us today.
I don't see anything wrong with taking the bible as it was taught 1000 years ago,but it is not for me,I don't accept things ,without doing some research,it is just the way my mind works.
I believe every person has their own way relating to God,and they do it in their own time.I don't worry about
hell,because I don't believe in it,so I don't feel any need to change what other people believe.
Well, I believe people are fallible, so I don't trust a pope or anyone else as an ultra-high authority. Scripture was canonized though, and as such is timeless.
This looks like a contradiction to me,sorry.People canonised the bible,people wrote it,inspired,I believe,but
how can you be sure,the ones who compiled it were inspired by God?
I find confusing,you rejecting the Pope, because you don't trust people... yet you accept the Canon which was decided by people - approved by popes and their
apostoles
Is that not chosing and picking as well?
I view it as the Constitution of Christianity. In America, we have our Constitution, and it is the law of the land - no man or law is above it. This is a very strong belief that most Americans have (though they interpret it differently), and core to making our system of government work. I take a similar attitude towards Scripture, because we serve a God who does not change. If Jesus said something, the Lord isn't going to change His mind about it in 500 years, a thousand years, or ever.
Again,I see a contradiction,I am sorry.
God does not change,but in the Bible ,he does change.
For example,the flood indicates a change in God,there are more examples,if needed,but just one,is enough,to challenge the claim God does not change,IMO.
The book of John has some very life-giving truth in it, stuff I needed to hear. Stuff like He will always forgive you when you ask (Jn 6:37), being safe in His hands (Jn 10:28-29), the promise of abundant life (Jn 10:10). The devil was ravaging my life with his lies, and the truth did set me free (Jn 8:32). Now, John is also an intolerant book, but it's either reliable as God's word or it isn't. And if it isn't, then the life-giving stuff can't be trusted, since the source isn't solid. Therefore, it's all or nothing with the Book of John, as it is with any book of the Bible. This is why I accept all of it, even the stuff that isn't so politically correct - it's good and true anyway, despite what people think.
I did not say anything against John, I simply asked for your personal interpretation/experience rather than a scriptural reference. Sorry I gave you an impression that I thought the scripture you chose was incorrect in any way.
The Gospels did change me,the words of Jesus are IMO the most important in the entire bible.
Old Testament passages on Jesus' divinity:
Psalm 2
Daniel 7:13-14 - The one like a son of man can only be another Person of God, because only God is deserving of such praise. No Jew would give such lofty language to anyone but God, yet, this one like a son of man
approaches the Ancient of Days. Jesus claimed to be this very being
many times.
Ezekiel 34 - this is the kicker here. God is fed up with the priests and Levites, so HE HIMSELF will come and tend the flock of His people (v.11). He did come!
New Testament claims:
John 1:1-3 - This shows us just how close the Father and Son are. The Word was with God, but the Word also WAS God. Furthermore, the Word was essential in the creation of the universe. So you have here two that are yet one. How does one explain this? Two distinct Persons of the same God.
John 8:58 - The I AM here is a direct reference to Exodus 3:14 - He is claiming to be the same God as the one Moses saw in the burning bush.
John 10:28-33 - This is very plain. Jesus claimed to be one with the Father, and the Jews were ready to stone Him for it. He said it, and they confirmed it - He was claiming deity.
John 13:13 - He approved of being called Lord, which is significant.
When you put these together, particularly with the Hebrew Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4, Mark 12:29) it becomes clear that the proper explanation is not two gods, but one. And when you note the distinction between the Father and Son in the above passages, they both must be two Persons of the same God.
I will get back to this,I need more time to look at it .
Thank you for posting it, I really appreciate it.
(I may actually start a new thread, can I quote you?)
My belief is rather literal. God literally created the world in six literal days. I'm not a YEC crusader, but that's the belief I am leaning towards.
I see.I don't see it impossible,but I wonder,why 6 days?
God could as well do it in 6 seconds...and if God is timeless,why days?
6 seconds,or 6000000000000 years,would be the same for God,after all.
This is why I prefer to agree with the science,who based on the light,calculated the age of universe.
I know God could make it look as old universe,but ..why?
This is the sort of reasoning leading me to believe,that the Genesis is not literal,but I don't dispute that God created it all.
It's not really meant to offend others, it's really a piece of wisdom. There are some people who just aren't worth trying to persuade about these matters, because their hearts are not open to the truth. If their hearts were open, then there could be a productive conversation. Think of it this way, with two political parties that have opposite views. A hardline member of one party isn't going to go to the other party's convention and think that he or she could convince people there to change their beliefs and switch to being principled members of his or her party. That unfortunate person would be shouted out of the place or worse. Jesus is saying to recognize closed hearts and obstinate people, commanding us not to waste our time and energy on them. They won't be moved, but the "witness" will be worse off than when he or she started.
Hmm,you say some people are not worth the scripture wisdom,but Jesus says God loves all the people,and there is a tale he says,about the lost sheep...so who decides who is worthy ?
You know,a person who is shown kindness,is more likely to listen to you,than a person who is told,in the words from the bible (the pearls to swine) that they are not worthy.
OK,they may not be open to you today,but if they see you acting with love,compassion,and patience,maybe they will open the heart,you assumed to be closed.
However,if they are being answered,with the perls for swine scripture,they will most likely think you are an arrogant rude judgemental person,and they will see you as a hypocrite,preaching love,acting ...not in a loving way.
Thank you for the post
Hey there....you mentioned in one of your posts..."How can we be sure that the Bible is correct"
Well..study the dead sea scrolls.
The Dead Sea Scrolls date from 250 BCE to 68 CE. Among them are some 230 biblical manuscripts representing nearly every book in the Hebrew Bible; more than 1000 years older than any previously known copies.
The scrolls contain the very words our Bible does today. God made sure it was kept pure. Don't you think God is BIG enough to do that? He made a tree, surely He could keep His Word pure.
I don't dispute,that the bible is based on ancient scriptures,I simply prefer,to think of the bible as a collection of inspired writings,compilled by Hebrews,and
Chrsitians,as a spiritual guide,and a historical document,rather than a perfect word of God.
This does not dispute,that there is a perfect word of God included,I just disagree with claims,there are no errors in the bible.
About God keeping it pure..what about free will of men?
What about free will of the translators,writers,etc?
Did God force them to transliterate, write word by word as it is?
Does God force translators to do so ?
If not,the bible is a work of men, who inspired by God,
wrote it and compiled it.
People are not perfect,and people make mistakes,and often, their good intention, or any other, influence their works.
This is why I prefer to look at the bible as a work of man, with invaluable message from God, but not a perfect word of God.
Thank you for your reply,I wish I could believe the bible is perfect,as it would make things so much easier,especialy,if all the people interpreted it the same way .
Also...a very popular way of thinking today is "Everyone translates the Bible differently" but there is only one way to read the Bible...God's way.
Can I ask what you mean?
With every song or book we can take it and make it be anything we want it to be. But the only true meaning lies with the Author. The Author knows what he meant by everything written.
I find the bible 'speaking ' to me,as needed.
It always surprises me,how the same passage can take on a different meaning every time.
This is why I value the bible,and I believe it changed my life.
That's why reading the Bible in context, studying the meaning of words, researching the times when they were written is important. We need to correctly divide the Word of God and treat it with such care so we don't misinterpret what the Great Author intended to say.
What happens when your research leads you to different conclusions?
What is you find some things contradictory?
This is the reason 'liberal' christians believe there is a room for different interpretation,I guess.
Q,
"conservative" is a relative term. It is relative to the values of whatever society is at issue. Conservatism simply means that a person desires to conserve, or preserve the traditional values and ideas of a given society.
For example, conservatism in china would be vastly different than conservatism in America. Conservatism in Europe is a little different than in the US, but much closer because their societies have much more similar traditions.
I agree,but I was led to believe,there is such a thing as conservative christianity,what you describe,does not require one to be a christian,does it?
Conservatism in terms of Christianity then, should be about conserving the traditions of the Christian faith, or the traditional understandings of the christian faith. In some cases this is accurate. However, most of the time, in the US, conservative christians have simply muddled their culture with their faith. Thus most of the time in the US when a person calls themselves a conservative christian, they are not really refering to conserving the traditional beliefs of Christianity, but rather the traditional values and beliefs of american society. In other words they have confused cultural conservatism, with christian conservatism.
This is what I have noticed,in this thread.
I have never really tried to separate christains,it was CF ,and mostly my time on staff last summer,who made me feel separated from 'them'.
I have noticed ,that so far every person who replied to me,has a different idea about what conservative christianity means,and I am surpirsed by many responses,so far.
Thank you for summing it up
This is relatively easy to do in the US because its true that there is alot of cross over between our traditional culture and Christianity.
True conservative Christianity can only be defined by adherence to scripture and the traditional teachings/understandings of the Christian Church.
Is there such a thing?Is there a Christian Church?
Another common problem is that people who consider themselves conservative often consider "conservative" to be a moral term, or a value term and it isn't. The fact that something is 'conservative' has little to do with it being moral, or right, or true. It just means that it is traditional.
This description is logical,and makes sense,the question is,what tradition?
This confusion comes because people frequently believe that their traditions are true and moral.
Yes,I find that the people,who are 'conservative',are more likely to be very sensitive about their beliefs being questioned,and confuse it with questioning God.
Conservatism, by nature, almost always coincides with authoritarian and legalistic personality types. For this reason any conservative group or movement, wether christian or cultural will have plenty of these types of people.
I agree that some extreme conservatives are authoritarian,but I would say most conservatives are in need of authority-such as a perfect bible,church traditions,religious leaders.
I used to post in GA a lot,with my old ID,
and this is the point I was trying to make,when religion was blamed,it is always the people,not the idea.
I believe that extreme conservative christians,would be extreme muslims,or atheist ..or other.
It is not a sign of being right for God,it is just a mindset,
peoples personality does not change by adopting an idea,they chose it based on their personality.
Further, Christianity is ultimately about relationship with God which is something different than simply agreeing to a set of ideas and rules. Thus there are many conservatives who agree to the rules and the ideas, but may not necessarily have much experience with actually knowing God. I have been that way myself.
I think relationship with God is the main focus of all CHristians,I hope so...I never doubted this ,in conservative chrsitians,but I sadly saw many failing to live up to expectations,they have of other people.
I am also confused with claims,of having the Truth,I just don't understand the certainty many have saying it.
This is not to suggest that the "rules" and ideas aren't important because they are, God revealed them for a reason. However, they are not a point unto themselves. They are only a means.
I believe God gave men the Law,to live the best possible life,rather than scoring some points.
Society without any rules,and ideas,would not survive,IMO.
Thank you for the reply,you summed up what I have noticed for me,there is much still I find dificult to understand,for now,I will take my time to think about things..and may come back later with some questions.
continued-
The problem with liberalism, as it is understood in the modern world is that it is philosophically based on the original sin of mankind.
The original sin in the garden of eden was that Man desired, and decided to set his own terms on what was good and evil, and to set his own terms on how he would come to God.
Interesting...this is the first time I have heard this explanation.
I don't beieve in original sin ,I believe it was God's plan,to allow men to become like Him,knowing good from bad.I see Satan as a perfect servant of God,doing its task,as instructed.
As Adam and Eve had no understanding,they will do wrong,they can not be accountable,can they?
Your view,that they thinking was liberal,is a new to me,
and I don't really understand,how could they do something,they did not understand,by choice.
The way I see it,they did not know good and bad,so they had no idea they are makig a bad choice.
That is the choice to have your will, be other than God's will. It is also the heart and soul of modern liberalism. The idea that we determine how we worship, we determine how we approach God, we determine what is moral, we determine what is right and what is wrong, etc.
Are we not suposed to do that?
The true message of Christianity is that we must conform ourselves and our wills to God through Christ. Liberalism in many ways is the opposite of this. Liberalism seeks to conform God to our vision. Liberalism judges God, holding him accountable to our understanding of good, justice, fairness etc. It conforms God, and doctrine, to us.
I don't know,I don't really know about liberalism,I was placed in that box,without actualy being aware there is one.
Liberal christians I know,are quite a few,and they all say the same,that following Jesus and his teachings,and acting as close as possible,to what one preaches,is the way to go,that showing love for creation,is showing love
for God.
They also beleive God is completely in charge,and His grace is for all the people,no matter what decisons they make in the life.
I need to have a look at the liberalism you are talking about,I may ask in liberal forum next.
I am, for the most part, a biblical literalist, I hold a YEC view, etc. However, the age of the earth is largely irrelevant, its the method of creation that is important. The method of creation has signficant doctrinal impact.
WHat do you mean by the method?Sorry,I am not sure .
I addressed my view of the YEC in the post above,somewhere,I don't know what is correct,by I tend to believe there is littel reason for 6 day creation,with making universe look old,if God is not affected by time.
I understand that literal bible is important for many people,it is the way they realte to God,and think,and I don't know if they are wrong,or right.
I am interested in the reasons,and experience,not here to tell people they are wrong (I have no idea anyway)
Thank you for your reply.
I'm going to give you my answers for this questions. Many of them will overlap what others have said while others you will notice a difference.
Most of the people in the church I attend are YEC.
OK.
Yeah, this is highly subjective and is based on our preconcieved notions about what's nice. It's weird because my experience has been the exact opposite. Christians are the loving individuals while others seem only to attack and destroy.
I have experience with both,christians who are caring,loving,and patient,I mentioned many of them in my post,and there is a group here,you would not want to go near,IMO.
They gossip,lie,belittle,stalk,at the same time as presenting themselves as the only 'true' Christians,and
sadly,all of them I come accross,held quite extreme conservative view,many are ex staff.
IMO,they cause a lot of damage,to the fragile christians,
and to the ones who are searching.
I have seen many christians in GA,to leave christinity,because of the behaviour of other CHristians,and that is very sad to see.
Every person will fall short of what they preach. It's what the Gosple shows, we all fall short of God's glory.
I agree,but there is a difference in trying,and talking about it.
I've had my problems with some of the staff here in the debate section but it was more with them pushing relativism on me while I'm trying to show Christ.
How do you show Christ? I see christians who are an example,in their behaviour,in their ways,and I see others,who behave like an elite,who judge,and threaten,
it all depends,on what you mean,by showing Christ.
What exactly was the topic?
Well you can ask here and specifically me since I am a former athiest I probably faced a lot of the questions you asked yourself.
I am also a former atheist,I was brought up in a 100% atheist way.I never searched for God,faith surprised me,but proved an amazing blessing.
How and at what time in your life you become a christian?
no problemo
I was pulled more into heavely logically heavely reformed churches...yet I still don't go to one.
LOL..I am still looking
I'm more of a "fundie" I believe in the inerrancy of scriptures, the historic nicean creed but I hold to an old earth position
because of the overwhemly evidence in physics and the lack of description in scripture.
I see.Thank you for the answer.
I replied to the people in this thread,why I find it dificult to believe in inerrant bible,I wish at times I could.
Those who are saved, are saved before the foundation of the world through God's grace.
Yes,I understand.What I don't understand is,why there is a condition to it.
Here is some scripture...
Ephesians:
1:4 For 8 he chose us in Christ 9 before the foundation of the world that we may be holy and unblemished 10 in his sight 11 in love. 12 1:5 He did this by predestining 13 us to adoption as his 14 sons 15 through Jesus Christ, according to the pleasure 16 of his will 1:6 to the praise of the glory of his grace 17 that he has freely bestowed on us in his dearly loved Son.18 1:7 In him
19 we have redemption through his blood,
20 the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace
1:8 that he lavished on us in all wisdom and insight.
1:9 He did this when he revealed 21 to us the secret 22 of his will, according to his good pleasure that he set forth 23 in Christ,24 1:10 toward the administration of the fullness of the times, to head up
25 all things in Christ the things in heaven
26 and the things on earth.
27 1:11 In Christ 28 we too have been claimed as Gods own possession, 29 since we were predestined according to the one purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will 1:12 so that we, who were the first to set our hope
30 on Christ,
31 would be to the praise of his glory.
1:13 And when
32 you heard the word of truth (the gospel of your salvation) when you believed in Christ
33 you were marked with the seal
34 of the promised Holy Spirit,
351:14 who is the down payment 36 of our inheritance, until the redemption of Gods own possession, 37 to the praise of his glory.
Romans:
8:28 And we know that all things work together 32 for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose,
8:29 because those whom
he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that his Son
33 would be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.
34 8:30 And
those he predestined, he also called; and those he called, he also justified; and those he justified, he also glorified
I will take time to look at this later
There is more verses talking about God's provinient grace. If you want more ask.
I will do.
Triune God based on three seperate but equal persons. See Nicean Creed for further clarification.
I am familiar with the concept,and can possibly accept it,I just don't see enough evidence for it in the scripture,I guess,I am in the middle about this ,waiting for something to help me make a decsion.
Old Earth, I don't think the scriptures strictly say that the earth was made in literal 7th day creation. Also from what I stated before physics seem to point to the old earth position as well.
I agree.
I did a bit of it and all I did was made fun of because athiest automallicaly assume you are wrong. They can only view the world through their materialistic pressupositions so debating with them is a waste of time. If any of them ask questions I welcome them but debating only leads to circles of fighting and name calling.
Yeah,often this is the case.I see the problem on boths ides,with christians having little patience,and getting offended ,failing to be an example,and atheist,often only listening to their own voice,arrogance and generalisation is often their downfall.
I also,often got frustrated in GA,and regreted what I sadi later.
Thank you,God bless.
On the trinity.
I believe the doctrine of the Trinity because it is what scripture presents, and it is what the Church has confirmed under the leading of the Holy Spirit.
I sit somewhere in the middle,my heart is closer to the trinity acceptance,than my mind.
I jsut don't see it as clearly,as people keep saying it is.
Holy Spirit leadership,is also questionable,I am sorry,just because of all different messages people say.
I know that there is one way to 'know',that is to look at the 'fruit'.
The trinity has become, in modern christianity, a relatively unimportant doctrine in practical terms. For most people if they switched from trinitarian to Oneness/modalist etc, it would really make very little difference in their beliefs, especially on the practical side.
This is not the way it was historically. The Trinity was one of the most important doctrines in the original Church because it deals entirely with who God is and how God has revealed himself, which is central to the christian faith.
Thank you for the reply.I started believing in the trinity,without a question,just later,I realised it does not matter to me all that much,and I don't see it clearly in the bible.
I really don't know,what to believe at this point,and I am looking for something to help me decide.
One of the reasons this has become less important to people is because of ignorance on the issue in a theological sense. People just don't know anything more than the very basic teaching, and thus they don't know any of the importance it has. Also, its due to the fact that so many christians worship, and follow the rules, but never really try to move in deeper in knowing God and communing with God.
Yes,I agree,the relationship with God is the most important part,it changes life completely.
This is why I elieve learning is important,even if I aproach it differently,than traditional christians,my goal is the same,getting as close to God,as it i s possible.
When you begin to do that, it becomes vitally important that you believe truth about God and that you know how he has revealed himself.
The truth comes up so often,but how to find it,is a different issue.
Many people who claim to have the truth,fail to live up to expectations,and many contradict one another.
It is not well known today, however, most of the instances in the Old Testament in which the Hebrew people began worshipping 'false gods' they began by applying false ideas and attributes to the true God. Most of the names of the false gods in the Old Testament are actually legitmate names or titles for the one True God, but they became ascociated with false beliefs about God. False beliefs about God usually lead people into idolatry and eventually belief in a false god.
This is very interesting,could you be more specific please?
On Salvation,
Salvation is attained through the sacrifice of Christ. This has a few aspects. First it is legal justification. We were lawbreakers and Jesus took the penalty for our lawbreaking, so the law is satisfied and justice is satisfied.
However, sin brought death long before the law existed. Sin always brings death. Thus Jesus died not only to pay the penalty of law, but he also died to set us free from sin. We enslaved ourselves to sin and Jesus died to purchase us back.
But as I said, (and as the bible says) sin brings death. Because of sin, mankind was dead to God. Jesus died in order to defeat death. His life is indestructible. So he died, in order that death itself would die. Jesus died and rose again so that we could be mystically, and truly joined to him, both in his death, and in his resurrection.
By being joined to him, we die to sin and to the old self, and we are born again to God. As much as we conform to Christ, we have the life of Christ.
All people are not saved, because even if all were forgiven, not all will embrace life in Christ. Salvation is ultimately about life and death, not just law and punnishment. The Holyness of God demands that only those who are like him, can be part of him. Those who insist on being contrary, can not be part of him
There is a few reasons,why I believe all the people are to be saved.
1:I dont believe God can fail.If he wants us all,He will have us all.
2:Jesus died for all the people,he brought the Good News.If you pay off my debts,they will be repaid,even if I dont know about it,and even if I reject it happened.
The only difference will be,my life wil be miserable,because I will still think I am in debt.
When we were in sin we were incapable of communing with God. Through Christ we are able to become sons of God, to become like God, and thus to partake in his life. Not all who begin to walk that path will finish it, and not all who have the opportunity, will ever begin.
I agree,that the closer one observes the Law,by loving and caring for the creation,the closer that person is to God.
The more a person focuses on the material life,the less time they have for God.
This is a trap I fall into a lot,by putting material issues of lifebefore spiritual.
I wish I could trust Lord more.
Thank you for your reply,I apreciate it,and I understand better,the importance of studying the scriptures,though,I see it a little differently.
As I said, I'm only mostly conservative. I agree 100% with the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds, and I'm a member of an evangelical and charismatic denomination (Assemblies of God) that is known for being conservative, though I may be one of the more liberal members of it.
I don't know this denomination,sorry.
But I'm not an inerrantist: I think the Bible is divinely inspired, but that good holy men of God were used to write it, and given the freedom to do so in their own words. And so it necessarily contains human opinions, human cultural perspectives and some human errors, but still I believe it is God's primary revelation to us, that it says what He wanted it to say and that it is authoritative.
I agree 100%
I'm moderate on most social/cultural issues, and as a political libertarian I don't think "legislating morality" is a proper role for government.
I am quite conservative in life,but tolerant of the choices of other people,libertarian in politics.
I have no quarrel with liberal Christianity in general, though I have problems with the arguments and theories of many liberals. Liberalism and Conservative are too broad and general for me to sink my fangs into. But if someone wants to argue the resurrection didn't really happen and tries to call himself a Christian, I'll be all over him.
I never really made any boxes,I saw people by the way they behave,but I was boxed as a liberal,so I decided to do more search about this.
I was called names by some self called conservatives,for being a liberal,so I am here to try to understand,what makes people so angry,and frustrated.
I can be very open and critical,but at least,I do not claim to knwo the truth,or be beter than others,I hope I dont.
I agree with what you said,generalising will always offend someone,and it looks,like each liberal and conservative,has their own ideas,about the issue.
I believe in ressurection,Jesus's divine origin,Jesus being God's son,without a single doubt.
I believe salvation is purely a gift from God, by grace alone, through faith alone, through the blood of Jesus Christ. It is freely offered to all, and we may accept or reject it, but we cannot earn it. Good works are what you do because you're saved, because those who belong to Christ will want to do good things, but no amount of good works or following of laws will ever save anyone.
I agree one can't earn it,but I don't agree,we need to accept it,to be 'saved' for the next life,just to be saved in this life.
As Jesus said, "no man cometh unto the Father but by me", so if Jesus doesn't vouch for you, you don't get in. Would He do that for non-Christians under some circumstances? Not my call, that's for Jesus to decide. But I know one sure way of salvation, and that's what I recommend everyone to take.
I believe Jesus died for all the people,took every 'sin'.
But this much I will say: I think we all are going to be surprised by many of the people in heaven we didn't expect to see there, and by the people we expected to see there who didn't make it.
I believe so,despite believing all the people will make it,I believe it will still be a surprise.
I'm an orthodox trinitarian, but I don't place a great deal of importance on it. If I were to find out in heaven that the unitarian view were correct, I'd say "oh, that's interesting" and move on.
That is good,sadly,some people say,they would feel cheated
I'm a theistic evolutionist, though I place little importance on that. It's enough for me that God made everything, however He did it. I'm curious about what processes He may have used, but whatever they were, it changes nothing.
I agree
Why am I an evolutionist? Because the science points that way, and reason and the laws of science are gifts from God too, which He expects us to us. Science and faith do not conflict, when both are rightly understood.
I agree
I sometimes do, but generally I prefer to share views with others in a friendly discussion mode rather than in a debate mode. I think we learn more sitting around a table with pizza and a pitcher of beer than we do lecturing each other from podiums.
Yes,debates only happen in the formal sense,on invitations.DIscussios often turn to arguments,but I have spent lot of time in GA,having a nice discussion,and even fun with people,comparing views,and information,I learned a lot there,from all the members(how not to be,from some )
Thanks for the response!!!
I understand your dilemma, and this is all I have to say....
Jesus did not come to save the righteous, but the sinners.
Hi WA!!You are WA who used to post alot in Crevo,I remember you
I agree,that Jesus had time for all the people,not many righteous around,IMO.
IE, no one is perfect, and we should not judge the Lord on other peoples failings.
WE should just pray for them, and thus let it show that we, humans, are weak sinners and thus God came to earth to bring us home.
The Church is a hospital for sinners.
God Bless.
I would not dare to judge God,but I can criticise some peoples perception of Him,that is OK,don't you think?
Prayers are always welcome,if they are genuine,but I saw many people use it,to show others,they need to be prayed for,as a form of offense.
Thank you for your reply .
Hello Ms. Q. Based on subsequent posts I'm not exactly sure what you're after, but I'll try and answer your questions as clearly as possible.
I wish I knew
I am correcting my views on conservative christians,right now,I hope.
One problem is that 'conservative' doesn't differentiate between doctrinal and ethical conservatism on the one hard, and political conservatism on the other. I'm both, but I will still have to give largely different answers to each question.
OK.
I am a conservative Christian for the primary reason that I completely accept God's sovereignty. Jesus Christ is Lord; that is no polite suggestion. The Kingdom of God is the cosmic empire of the Almighty; that is no volunteer organization. I am a conservative Christian because God elected me; I did not elect God.
This is the same for all Christians,I assume.
I am a conservative politically because I believe that all people have a right to certain inalienable freedoms inasmuch as their exercise of said freedoms do not impinge upon the freedoms of others. Human freedoms to life, freedom of conscience, freedom of thought and speech, freedom of religion and expression, freedom of assembly and petition, the liberty to bear means of self-defense from rouge criminals, foreign attack, and government oppression, freedom to own private property, freedom to engage in commerce and trade without restrictions, freedom to enjoy the fruits of one's labor without having it seized by criminals, monopolies, or the IRS. And I believe that the United States, for all its faults, has proven the best guarantor of these freedoms at home and abroad.
I agree with most conservative values,though I am not conservative politicaly,I am libertarian.
I believe that God has foreordained some to salvation based upon his foreknowledge of his own future election of individuals through the means of grace, Word and Sacrament. I believe this unilateral grace generates faith in the elect, on the basis of which they are permitted to join the church through baptism. I do not believe, however, that God predestines people to hell. They are there of their own accord, through ignorance or resistance to the call of the Spirit.
This I find somehow a contradiction.If a person is predestined to be saved,then the rest ..what are they predestined to?IS there anything people can do at all?
Is there any choice?
Can you explain please?
I believe the elect spend eternity in communion with God, first in heaven and then more perminantly in a renewed physical state in resurrected, glorified bodies.
OK
And I believe that those who are ignorant of the gospel of Jesus Christ or resist the call of God spend eternity seperated from God. Those who actively resisted the call and/or performed great evil deeds are likely to be punished in eternal fire; those who merely are seperated from God, the Creator and Ground of Being, I imagine will still lack bliss but will largely go into a state of near-annihilation, absorbed into the vacuum at the center of their hollow souls.
I see what you mean now.
DO you think it is possible to resist God actively?
I absolutely believe in the orthodox Catholic view of the Trinity.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit always act in tandem, so those who know God by his actions (in creation, in the election of Israel) know him in his functional unity, that is, as sovereign Yahweh. But they perform different functions- the Father wills all action, the Son guides all action, and the Spirit effects all action- so those who know God through the wisdom (incarnate Christ) and power (outpouring of the Spirit) become aware of his Trinitarian nature.
OK
YOu base this belief on? I don't se it in the bible,I am sorry,ut I don't disagree.
The Trinity, according to Catholic orthodoxy, works as such: the Father is transcendent of all reality. He is a perfect being. Being a perfect being, the Father has a self imagine, which is therefore also perfect, and, existence being a quality of perfection, exists. This existant self-image of the Father is the Son, as Colossians 2 and Hebrews 1 say. The Son is the [self-]image of the invisible [transcendent] God. Then in turn, the Father and the Son love each other perfectly; this perfect love is also existant, and thus, the Holy Spirit
I see.
That's the philosophical explanation of why one can logically believe in the Trinity.
Thank you
But why believe it in the first place? Because of the shared existential experience of the first Christians. When they experienced a man, Christ, who claimed divine authority (forgiveness of sins, reconstitution of the temple, worship) and seemed to have the ability to back it up (miracles, resurrection), but appeared distinct from some other divine entity known as the Father (which is sometimes thought to be Yahweh; this is incorrect),
This is interesting,why is it not correct?
they came to know a distinction within the heart of God. A third distinction came with the coming of the Holy Spirit. It was a lived, historical experience that gave the first Christians insight into reality beyond action, into the realm of being. Thus they worshipped all three as God, attributed the qualities of God to all three, but recognized them as distinct.
I see.
I think that the earliest record of the universe comes with background radiation produced some 13.7 billion years ago by the Big Bang, which might be the point of creation.
Yes.
I think God created the universe in just such a way as to produce life; if even a single law of the universe where not such as it is (and they didn't need to be; it's logical to conceive of a universe without gravity), then life wouldn't have existed. The earth was formed out of swirls of gas, and humans out of goo; these processes were carefully set up by God. I don't believe in special acts of creation as described by creationists.
This is close to what I believe.
I believe that the Genesis account is largely metaphorical. The six days represent three sets of realms and rules, with day one being the realms ruled by the create-kings of day four, day two paired with five, and so on. Thus the day and night (day one) are ruled over by the sun and moon (day four), the sky and water (day two) ruled over by the birds and fish (day three), etc.
Interesting,it would be good to talk more,once I get this lot of information processed.
I made a post about genesis a few years ago,I think it may be similar to what you are saying, at least in principle.I will see if I can find it,in case you are interested.
I believe that the purpose of the Genesis account is meant to emphasize monotheism (one God, not a series of gods, demi-gods, or angels, created the universe), that creation was purposeful (it was not an accident, as in the Babylonian accounts), it is good (again, not a mistake), and it is orderly (demonstrated by the pairings of the days). I think these themes would be far more important to countering the Baal and Marduk cults of the ancient Near East than any sort of scientific-historical description of cosmology.
I am interested in it,not very conservative though,is it?
And nevertheless, I believe in a historic Adam, who was specially chosen by God to represent God to man (as a prophet), represent man to God (as a priest), and rule of man in the name of God (as a king). Prophet, priest, and king; thus Adam was indeed the image of Christ, and according to Trinitarian theology, was in turn the image of God. He failed in this task, and thus the fall. But I do believe that there were other humans around over whom he ruled; but their status as image-bearers rested on his duties as prophet, priest, and king, and their expulsion of the original Eden-community was based on his failure in that regard- just as our salvation depends on the work of Christ.
Again,this is very interesting,but..is it conservative?Is it based in the bible?
Hope that clears some things up.
Actualy,it did the opposite
I had some idea about who conservatives are,up to your post.It may be just me,but what you wrote,was quite different to the other responses.
Thank you for your reply,I hope to talk again.
_________________________________________
I need time to think,and look into liberals a bit...but I am really pleased,I received many answers,at least,some ideas I had are now challenged,and will prevent me generalising (I hope) in the furture.
Thank you all again.
