We Don't Need Religion, We Need Jesus

[JM]

Nope.

 

[JacobHall86]

This idea of Christianity not being a religion is ridiculous. It is absolutely a religion. The issue here isn't religion but moralism. I wish Driscoll would use words more accurately than he does. His flippant usage of whatever word he wants in whatever situation he wants is sloppy. Words have meanings, and we can't just change or adapt them on a whim.

Also, James uses the term religion in the positive.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

This idea of Christianity not being a religion is ridiculous. It is absolutely a religion. The issue here isn't religion but moralism. I wish Driscoll would use words more accurately than he does. His flippant usage of whatever word he wants in whatever situation he wants is sloppy. Words have meanings, and we can't just change or adapt them on a whim.

Also, James uses the term religion in the positive.

I concur.

 

[JM]

Face it folks, the meaning of words change over time. I agree that pure religion is a good thing but the video is not about pure religion...now is it?

lol

 

[dies-l]

Face it folks, the meaning of words change over time. I agree that pure religion is a good thing but the video is not about pure religion...now is it?

lol

But, the meaning of the word "religion" has not changed, except in some evangelical circles where people want to pretend that their version of Christianity is not religion. The problem is that they operate on a a made-up definition of "religion" that is used by no one outside of those groups who want to insist that their religion is not "religion". This all makes messages such as these not only unnecessarily confusing to people who are not already part of these particular religious circles, it also presents an image of evangelical Christians as a a group that is out of touch with reality. This is why I don't get behind the "Christianity is not a religion" type messages.

 

[JM]

And that’s the problem. Driscoll isn’t dealing with folks that come from evangelical circles, he preaches to one of the most unchurched areas in North America. His flock, and many people I know, relate “religion” with pharisaical Christianity. The judgemental “religion” that brings the Law and no Gospel, that condemns but doesn’t lift up, that refuses to preach the Good News AND feed the poor. Religion is understood as something that is used to be divisive and something done on Sundays, where you tithe from your spice racks but fail to show mercy.

We no longer live in a Christianized North America where people know what we are talking about, there has been a fundamental shift in the way people view the world.

 

[dies-l]

And that’s the problem. Driscoll isn’t dealing with folks that come from evangelical circles, he preaches to one of the most unchurched areas in North America.

And, this goes precisely to my point. To most people outside of these circles, this message would come across as patently dishonest or completely out of touch.

His flock, and many people I know, relate “religion” with pharisaical Christianity.

I have never met a person, other than those within certain aforementioned evangelical circles whose definition of "religion" is limited to Pharisaical Christianity. That concept of religion is an invention of certain evangelical Christians, primarily for marketing purposes.

The judgemental “religion” that brings the Law and no Gospel, that condemns but doesn’t lift up, that refuses to preach the Good News AND feed the poor. Religion is understood as something that is used to be divisive and something done on Sundays, where you tithe from your spice racks but fail to show mercy.

Yes, this generalization of religion is very popular in some evangelical churches. However, in common English usage, this is not so.

We no longer live in a Christianized North America where people know what we are talking about, there has been a fundamental shift in the way people view the world.

And, I propose that to use an inaccurate definition of "religion" to market and sell evangelical Christianity is dangerous response to this trend, especially when new believers and skeptics can do a quick search of Scripture and find that the Bible refers to genuine Christianity as "religion".

Really, if not for his horribly inaccurate use and abuse of the English language, I would tend to agree with Driscoll. But, the anti-"religion" sentiment that has become popular in the last decade or so in evangelicalism is big pet peeve of mine, because it shows incredible ignorance of Scripture.

 

[JM]

And, this goes precisely to my point. To most people outside of these circles, this message would come across as patently dishonest or completely out of touch.

Like I posted, he’s not worried about your closed circles and religious jargon.

I have never met a person, other than those within certain aforementioned evangelical circles whose definition of "religion" is limited to Pharisaical Christianity. That concept of religion is an invention of certain evangelical Christians, primarily for marketing purposes.

We will have to disagree on this one. I live in liberal Ontario Canada and most folks here see it different. Perhaps it’s a boarder thing? We’ll agree to disagree.

Yes, this generalization of religion is very popular in some evangelical churches. However, in common English usage, this is not so.

“Yes, your generalization of evangelical churches is popular in your circles”…see how easy it is to be as dismissive as you? lol

And, I propose that to use an inaccurate definition of "religion" to market and sell evangelical Christianity is dangerous response to this trend, especially when new believers and skeptics can do a quick search of Scripture and find that the Bible refers to genuine Christianity as "religion".

I’ve been given rep points for this post so I don’t think it’s too far off the mark. What’s dangerous is to ignore how words change and force religious jargon on unchurch people.

Really, if not for his horribly inaccurate use and abuse of the English language, I would tend to agree with Driscoll.

Grand standing much? lol You are being overly dramatic…even though you claim to agree.

But, the anti-"religion" sentiment that has become popular in the last decade or so in evangelicalism is big pet peeve of mine, because it shows incredible ignorance of Scripture.

Ok, you were wounded personally and for that I ask your forgiveness.

What is "religion"?

 

[JoyHelpingHands]

I find this scripture really interesting: James 1:27 ~ 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.

 

[dies-l]

Like I posted, he’s not worried about your closed circles and religious jargon.

But, he is obviously speaking to a small closed religious circle.

We will have to disagree on this one. I live in liberal Ontario Canada and most folks here see it different. Perhaps it’s a boarder thing? We’ll agree to disagree.

I am happy with agreeing to disagree. But, I would challenge you to question whether the meaning of "religion" has truly changed or whether you are merely subscribing to a confirmation bias.

"Yes, your generalization of evangelical churches is popular in your circles”…see how easy it is to be as dismissive as you? lol

Except, I am not at all talking about all evangelicals. I am myself an evangelical, and I am even an insider in several circles where this type of anti-religion rhetoric is fairly common. I am not merely dismissing some "other" group. I am criticizing a trend within a group that I am myself a part of.

I’ve been given rep points for this post so I don’t think it’s too far off the mark.

Congratulations. Nonetheless, I fail to see what the first half of your sentence has to do with the last.

What’s dangerous is to ignore how words change and force religious jargon on unchurch people.

I am in a profession that demands that I maintain strong and up to date knowledge about how English is used. I am not ignoring the fact that language does indeed change meaning, sometimes even over a very short period of time. I have even argued that point in other threads. I am merely pointing out that there is no evidence outside of the evangelical community that this is so with the word "religion".

Grand standing much? lol You are being overly dramatic…

I don't think I am. But, I guess you are entitled to your opinion.

even though you claim to agree.

Are you calling me a liar?

Ok, you were wounded personally and for that I ask your forgiveness.

I wasn't wounded personally. I am just trying to encourage self-reflection and self-criticism of some of the arguments that we evangelicals seem to find persuasive. My point is that to most people outside of evangelical circles the "Jesus vs. religion" distinction is misinformed at best, if not outright dishonest. This, in turn, becomes an obstacle in preaching the gospel to reasonably well educated skeptics.

What is "religion"?[/QUOTE]

Not that religious tolerance is an authority on the subject, but since you brought it up, most of the definitions on the site would clearly include biblical Christianity, including the basic set of beliefs and concepts that Driscoll is advocating for.

In general usage, religion refers to belief in deity or other supernatural forces and human beings' response to them. Jesus without deity or supernaturalism is heresy. Christianity without a human response (whether conscious or not) is universalism.

 

[JM]

We’ve both made posts expressing our differing points of view, anything more would be arguing for the sake of arguing. I want no part of that.

 

[dies-l]

We’ve both made posts expressing our differing points of view, anything more would be arguing for the sake of arguing. I want no part of that.

Fair enough.

 

[JM]

Thank you brother.

 

[DD2008]

My pastor says he wants to puke when someone calls him religious.

 

[BiblebelievingChristian]

Point is that you can lead without having a title (which NT Christians never have).

Actually, the leaders in the NT are referred to as elders, bishops, presbyters (priests), and deacons which are all leadership titles.