What exactly is a liberal Christian?

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

I think if I saw anyone staving, I would give them food, regardless of if they were my enemy, whether they deserved to be fed or not, or any other criteria. But that's just me.

It shows that you are familiar with Jesus' teaching on the subject as well. We are meant to be perfect, like our Father in heaven is perfect, who makes the sun shine on righteous and unrighteous alike.

Quite apart from simple humanity (aka do-gooder liberal hanky-squeezing emotionalism ), we are meant to reflect the generosity of God, who offers forgiveness to people who don't deserve it - indeed, by definition, forgiveness is always undeserved. I'm concerned that conservatism in this case emphasises a cold justice with no room for mercy or forgiveness.

But Buck plays a clever game - categorising welfare recipients as people who "don't want to work". And moreover, many of these people have children - is he happy to let them starve as well? Who knows?

 

[TScott]

*NEWSFLASH*

The fact that Muslims habitually practice terrorism; blowing up busses, airplanes, and discoteques, should serve to raise a "clue flag" to the entire world that, for the most part is NOT raised because of aggressive efforts by our own liberal newsmedia to bury the facts under a mountain of liberal, brotherly love and push the propaganda that Islam is a religion of peace.

Islam is not a religion of peace, anyone who says otherwise is either ill-informed, or a liar.

Also, the fact that TSA does not target the extra security checks of Arabs at the airport is proof that this nation does not have the first clue of how to provide adequate security for our citizens. If liberal Clintonite Norm Mineta, would get over his flashbacks of 1941 (incarceration of the Japanese-Americans supported by the liberal Democrats under Roosevelt) and start PROFILING potential terrorists instead of having 80-year old grandmas remove their orthepedic shoes for "security" (sic)...maybe then the word would get around the terror cells and they'd go back to the dunes.

Oh, but I can hear the reply: "You're just being a racist!"; yeah, here's where I get it from...

I don't think you could classify Buck as a "racist" since semitic people are considered caucasian. I must say, and I don't mean this as an attack, but when I read his posts the word "bigot" does come to mind.
I have nieghbors who are Islamic people, and they are indeed very peaceful people. They do not hate non-Islamic people at all, and they found the events of 9-11 just as disturbing as the rest of us. I think people like Buck are the problem. I think Buck has more in common with Osama Bin Laden than my nieghbors.

 

[Tangnefedd]

I am a liberal Christian. The Bible needs to be read in the light of the culture that existed 2000 years ago. Jesus was a revolutionary and would attract the same amount of disapproval today in right wing Christian circles as he did then! Many of the writers of the Bible put their own spin on events. In much of the OT God appears to be a homiciadal maniac, zapping people for the smallest offence. It is not logical to take the Bible as a historical account, it isn't. Jesus was a remarkable person and his teaching equates well in the 21st century, whereas some of St Paul's teaching is definitely out of date, his attitude to women, for instance!

 

[naimas]

Paul is a waverer. His words in one book contradict words in another. He speaks of grace in one text as pleasing God and then in the next he speaks about works, and jewish rules. He contradicts himself on circumcision, about food and women.

Even when he is consistent his attitudes and personality are contrary to the character, teachings and life of Jesus. Fundamentalism cannot exist with being fed by the four gospels. It needs the intolerance, the seperation, the high calling titles and abhorrance of all things unsaved that Paul brings. I read him and am blessed but in NO WAY should he have the sway he has over the church. Legalists and haters get their Scriptures from him (in the NT) In truth the modern Christian church has two Gods. Jesus and Paul. Jesus we read about and Paul we model our lives after. Homeschooling, legalism, short hair, legalistic modesty, women bashing, gay hating, no make up or jewelry.... all these fundamental facts of the church come from Paul, not Jesus. With Paul we get to hate, be intolerant, be seperatist, spit judgement. Just the fact that fundamentalist pages on the net do little other than bash and put and put down every other kind of believer (the Burger King comment early in the post) shows that these people are NOT like Jesus but like Paul. I choose to follow the teachings of Jesus because He and only He is Gods Son. The fundamentalist church needs to repent for putting Paul on such a pedal as to almost put him equal with Christ. In fact more so. Paul gets sooooooooo many books in the NT to completely undermine what Christ did in four. Fundies do have to have the Epistles. There is NO substance for their legalism in the Gospels.

Now I will be called a liberal. But I am a follower of Christ sick of seeing people who hate and do not love their brothers. Which is THE WAY according to Christ that his followers would be known. I see little if any love in the demanding legalism of fundamentalism. Call me a liberal but I am trying to be like the Son of God here (who atleast for now is still the subject of the Book until Paul gets elevated even higher by misguided Bible thumpers)

Maybe those people can do us a favor and take down the golden cross at their church and replace it with a flaming P (for Paul) so that the world will know who they really are in love with and whose commandments they follow.

 

[EliasEmmanuel]

Even when he is consistent his attitudes and personality are contrary to the character, teachings and life of Jesus. Fundamentalism cannot exist with being fed by the four gospels. It needs the intolerance, the seperation, the high calling titles and abhorrance of all things unsaved that Paul brings. I read him and am blessed but in NO WAY should he have the sway he has over the church. Legalists and haters get their Scriptures from him (in the NT) In truth the modern Christian church has two Gods. Jesus and Paul. Jesus we read about and Paul we model our lives after. Homeschooling, legalism, short hair, legalistic modesty, women bashing, gay hating, no make up or jewelry.... all these fundamental facts of the church come from Paul, not Jesus. With Paul we get to hate, be intolerant, be seperatist, spit judgement. Just the fact that fundamentalist pages on the net do little other than bash and put and put down every other kind of believer (the Burger King comment early in the post) shows that these people are NOT like Jesus but like Paul.

It's interesting to me that you say that.... because what brought me OUT of legalism when I was a teenager was a fresh reading of the NT, and Paul's books played a huge role in telling me that Love is the ultimate Christian imperative, that works cannot save, that Christianity is bigger than Christian Culture, that God isn't superficial and petty and that hatred for "outsiders" (or anyone) might as well be hatred of Jesus Himself. Coming from a somewhat legalistic and xenophobic (IMO) church, books like Romans and Galatians were a breath of fresh air and addressed the problems and issues I'd come under beautifully.

IMO the only way you can read Paul as giving licence to hatred and legalism to to read him the same way the legalists you mentioned do, ie: incompletely and outside context.

 

[seebs]

Paul is an interesting test; if you read him as a reformed Jew, trying to explain something new to him, he's the anithesis of legalism. If you compare him to John, or Jesus, he sounds quite legalistic.

 

[EliasEmmanuel]

Paul is an interesting test; if you read him as a reformed Jew, trying to explain something new to him, he's the anithesis of legalism. If you compare him to John, or Jesus, he sounds quite legalistic.

Quite possibly. But then you also have to consider audience and circumstances.... like what he was writing to address in Corinth and Galatia. I would've been torqued off and saying "don't do this!" too (and he still manages things like the "Love Chapter" and Galatian's no nonsense words on grace)

 

[TScott]

I think Seebs is right. Paul's epistles are probably more mis-understood than anything else in the New Testament because of context. I always picture Paul as a man who is almost frantic in his desire to get the "good news" out about the coming of the new day. Issues of day to day living are not important because he sees a future where those things are irrelevent.

 

[artybloke]

The other thing to remember about Paul is that he wasn't writing "to" us at all; he was writing first and formost to a group of troublesome churches. Sometimes he includes quotes from letters written to him then argues against them (always look out for a "but" phrase further down the page!)

 

[BarbB]

The other thing to remember about Paul is that he wasn't writing "to" us at all; he was writing first and formost to a group of troublesome churches. Sometimes he includes quotes from letters written to him then argues against them (always look out for a "but" phrase further down the page!)

Ha ha ha - and we don't cause enought trouble today? That's why I love Paul - the problems never change, just the cultural context.

 

[naimas]

Wow, I see this forum has some informed people. That is refreshing. I totally agree that he was writing to some very troubled churches (that were involved in sex/worship and other cult activities) Yet today we have people taking Pauls words and making it sound like the average person is horrible which is not the case.

Paul wavers, which means he is often so right and then maybe the stress of the journey, the arguments with people, the provacative and alluring cults, the doubts of followers of his validity get to him and he vents in a letter. Modern people read that letter as "Thus sayeth the Lord" and don't look at the background.

I agree that some of the best GRACE chapters are written by Paul.

I do want to say though that I no longer ascribe to the lenient and enabling statements like " well you just cant look at the actions or words of a few...because they are NOT the actions or words of a few but virtually tens of thousands of misguided leaders and tv preachers and they have great influence over the masses who want to believe in this God of Love. Yet we learn to strain at a gnat and hate Harry Potter and gays and liberals, and demonize Smurfs and ET.....and when people do this all that is said is its just a small minority of believers that do that...but they are very vocal and steal the spotlight and crave attention and virtually no one challenges them or preaches against them. When has TBN or CBN publically preached against the godhates**** guy? Neither TBN nor CBN nor most Christian news sources even touched the story of the Texas Ministers who whipped that little boy so bad...but yet everyday you turn on CBN and its anti gay this or this movie is so bad or warn your kids about this toy or playing card. We strain out gnats (impure insect) yet swallow camels (impure, unclean animal)

We listen to our Pastors use Pauls words for political and elitist reasons and how many of us say, Dude you need to get over your "I hate my neighbor thing" because thats not what Paul was really meaning when he wrote stuff.

Yet they open up the book and just read and dont even think about the time period, culture or background of his writings. I even get sick going to the Christian bookstore because so much of it is propaganda that has errors in dates and places, is filled with tradition that has long since been refuted yet it still gets dished out as THUS SAYETH THE LORD because liberals and grace loving believers allow it to unchallenged. ANY dominant voice sways the sheep. Liberals have tried to be gentle and peaceable and just practice Christ while others have come in and thumped Bibles and isolated believers and caused great pain and hurt and little is said about them. But God forbid another Harry Potter movie come out......

Paul is not evil, and was a man who burned with passion for God. He no doubt was a man who felt much pain over how he persecuted the church before conversion. And he had to fight to be heard. He is the only writer who constantly has to acclaim his calling over and over again in his greetings and letters. This ofcourse goes over the head of some Fundy Ministers who were barely saved, then went to a four year school and come out and start preaching from a book they really barely know. It shows in their prejudice and conclusions and reveals that they want to be powermongers. The Epistles and the OT allow them to do that. Granted there is much beauty and grace in them and watching (or reading) as Paul struggles to forgive himself, struggles to say goodbye to his past as a man of the Law is very comforting and interesting. One watches him slip up and teeter between law and grace at times. But is there a Fundamental who will admit that? Rare if. They esteem Paul as unrefutable and infallible in his words, deeds and doctrine. This is wrong.

Paul had a staff of approx 60 people on his staff and 1/3 were women and these women had power and preached.

Yet you wont hear THAT in a Fundamentalist church.

Pauls words about women are misunderstood because the translations to English are sloppy, were done with prejudice (at times) and anyone can now get Bible software and translate it for themselves and SEE clear proof that the "modern" translators chose sometimes the 4th or 5th possible meaning listed for a word over the 1st or 2nd most likely and by doing this it distorts the Scripture and makes Paul look like a woman hater which he was not if you do the study and see. Cross referencing the words he used in those verses with how they are used in others shows us that INDEED Paul was refering in casual conversation and not sacred Scripture tone about women in particular churches because they were (in very limited cases) using their new faith to overpower their husbands and dominate them.

But anyone who just gets up behind the pulpit with the ill fitting suit and tie and just cracks the Book and preaches about Pauls words is going to really do some damage with some passages. Pauls writing style mixes brutish, stutted short comment, with elegant, poetic speech. Truly he was a man of learning surrounded by and preaching to the commoner. Hence the double tones of his letters. What annoys me is when Ministers just preach a Scripture as though it is a prepackaged, ready to sell fast food item. This is not always the case.

Another thing that annoys me is the nauseating realization that we (here) are diving more into the Scriptures and seeking truth and knowledge more than the very people we PAY weekly salaries to do this as Ministers. Our last 10 posts have done more background study then ANY Bible school class I attended. Thats sad, and worse, it shows in the Sunday Sermons.

Paul is a man who loved God and was struggling with persecution, peer rejection, pride and the memory of the law. He is not infallible and neither are his words. I view myself as (like others to be commended for such study and discovery of Scripture) instead the Fundies call us liberals, passage pickers, doubters of the Bible and having the sin of the Israelites) I know because everyone in my family is a Fundy and I have AG Ministers in my family whose minds crash whenever I even dig deep into a passage and tell them about it. They want and preach a prepackaged ready to wear Scripture. Yet they declare themselves be speakers of truth. You cant have it both ways.

 

[EliasEmmanuel]

I do want to say though that I no longer ascribe to the lenient and enabling statements like " well you just cant look at the actions or words of a few...because they are NOT the actions or words of a few but virtually tens of thousands of misguided leaders and tv preachers and they have great influence over the masses who want to believe in this God of Love. Yet we learn to strain at a gnat and hate Harry Potter and gays and liberals, and demonize Smurfs and ET.....and when people do this all that is said is its just a small minority of believers that do that...but they are very vocal and steal the spotlight and crave attention and virtually no one challenges them or preaches against them. When has TBN or CBN publically preached against the godhates**** guy? Neither TBN nor CBN nor most Christian news sources even touched the story of the Texas Ministers who whipped that little boy so bad...but yet everyday you turn on CBN and its anti gay this or this movie is so bad or warn your kids about this toy or playing card. We strain out gnats (impure insect) yet swallow camels (impure, unclean animal)

Amen, amen, a hundred times amen.....

 

[Fideist]

We listen to our Pastors use Pauls words for political and elitist reasons and how many of us say, Dude you need to get over your "I hate my neighbor thing" because thats not what Paul was really meaning when he wrote stuff.

Bingo!

Paul had a staff of approx 60 people on his staff and 1/3 were women and these women had power and preached.

Yet you wont hear THAT in a Fundamentalist church.

Probably not.

Pauls words about women are misunderstood because the translations to English are sloppy, were done with prejudice (at times)...

I agree with the above and most of the rest of your post. I'm no expert on Paul, but when read in context, he's nowhere near as bad as some seem to think.

 

[artybloke]

Naimas, thank you. It's about time we who believe and trust in the love and grace of God started speaking the truth to the power-hungry Pharisees and legalists of fundamentalism.

Preach on.

 

[chalice_thunder]

Naimas, thank you. It's about time we who believe and trust in the love and grace of God started speaking the truth to the power-hungry Pharisees and legalists of fundamentalism.

Preach on.

RIGHT ON!

 

[naimas]

Consider my day........made!

 

[Rocinante]

Damascus one day. He almost died of food poisoning, had a few hallucinations and went downhill from there.

Worse.....most of his stuff is really hard to understand and creates more problems in the churches than solutions.

Have you ever tried reading the Bible minus the ramblings of Paul?

Try it and see if things don't go better.

I'm a fairly liberal Christian.

 

[seebs]

Well, consider 2 Peter 3:16, which says that Paul is hard to understand. I think that, if you take the time to study his writing, he's got a lot to say that's worth reading. Casual reads produce nonsense, however.

 

[EliasEmmanuel]

Well, consider 2 Peter 3:16, which says that Paul is hard to understand. I think that, if you take the time to study his writing, he's got a lot to say that's worth reading. Casual reads produce nonsense, however.

I wouldn't say nonsense, necessarily.... but that's the case with most of scripture. People screw it all up because they're not willing to dig deeper, and insist on reading an ancient eastern book like a modern western one...

And as far as Paul (or any of it) not making sense, let's all remember to give him a stern talking to in Kingdom Come for not keeping 21st century english-speaking american Christians in mind when he was writing his correspondence to the 1st century, greek speaking Judeo-hellenistic churches......

 

[Rocinante]

Well, consider 2 Peter 3:16, which says that Paul is hard to understand. I think that, if you take the time to study his writing, he's got a lot to say that's worth reading.

I agree. However, you could say that about almost every nutty televangelist on TBN.......even Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell have a lot to say that's correct and fruitful. They are also full of bigotry and error.

Just because a religious leader has some truth in his message does not mean he's ok.

In the end, each of us has to meet God in our own way, guided by the Holy Spirit.

Paul has no lock on truth and seems more confused than most about grace and sin.