What exactly is a liberal Christian?

[James Sez]

To get back to the original question about us liberals. I think a liberal is someone who would hopefully think before they cast the first stone. Many of the conservatives on here are so busy stoning people in the name of Jesus, that it seems it would be impossible for them to even hear Jesus ask the question. Yea, I know, liberals cast stones too, but why don't you conservatives show and teach us liberal apostates the correct way to handle those with whom we disagree-lead the way. You only portray Jesus the judge and forget that He hung with those whom you so readily condemn, those of us who are not as perfect and Godly as you.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

1CO 1:2 To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy,

Eph 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

HEB 12:14 Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy;

1Pet1:15 But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; 16 for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy."

Rom6:22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life

2CO 7:1 Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God.

Seems Holiness is very much a part of the new testament code!!

In the New Testament, holiness is no longer connected with ritual observance to purity regulations.

 

[Neenie]

To get back to the original question about us liberals. I think a liberal is someone who would hopefully think before they cast the first stone. Many of the conservatives on here are so busy stoning people in the name of Jesus, that it seems it would be impossible for them to even hear Jesus ask the question. Yea, I know, liberals cast stones too, but why don't you conservatives show and teach us liberal apostates the correct way to handle those with whom we disagree-lead the way. You only portray Jesus the judge and forget that He hung with those whom you so readily condemn, those of us who are not as perfect and Godly as you.

This post touched my heart it is so true.
I’m a fairly new Christian and when I say or do something that a conservative Christian does not like they usually get angry and throw a ton of scripture’s at you, get uptight then shun you, why are some of them so miserable? If you say something wrong why can’t they be more loving in their correction? I think most people will listen to them if they are.
My message to them is to stop throwing stones at people who make mistakes in life and start throwing a bit of love,compassion and understanding, that’s what I believe Jesus wants us to do.

 

[Buck72]

The point of that story is that the people you hate the most, well, if one of them is a good person, then he is more your neighbor than members of the groups you "accept".

Sorry seebs, we need some BIBLE in here so that we don't miss the point:

Where does this "good person" standard come from? My Bible tells me that there is nothing good about me, and that apart from Christ I can do nothing, that my very salvation is to His glory.

Rom 3:12 ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE."

Mat 19:17 And He said to him, "Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments."

That's diversity. If you want to understand that story fully, imagine that it was told in Georgia shortly after the Civil war, and that it was called "the parable of the good Negro". That'll get you close to how much the audience hated and despised the Samaritans, but it still falls a bit short.

Diversity? I see the parable leading to a standard of true righteouness based upon being rooted in Christ to ACT in faith - a UNIFIED, singular faith - not a diverse faith; although diverse in race, gender, social status, etc., yes. But these are all one on Christ, if they are in Christ, they are no longer diverse.

God wants diversity. We know this because He created diversity. He didn't stop after the first person; we're like potato chips that way.

The ENTIRE CHAPTER of John 17 refutes the idea that God wants diversity. The only comparable diversity created by God of any measure was at Babel, and that was not a nessecarily good thing.

Yes, and He also forbids the Jews from wearing mixed fabrics, or eating shellfish.

The Law:

Rom 3:20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.

Rom 3:28-31 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law.
Gal 2:21 "I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly."

We came past the holiness code. It is no longer part of our faith.

Negative. This is absolutely incorrect. oworm correctly portrayed that a few posts back.

In the Old Testament, contact with unclean things made you unclean. In the New Testament, contact with unclean things purifies them.

Not entirely true, the law was set to make a distinction of what was clean/unclean:

Lev 10:10 and so as to make a distinction between the holy and the profane, and between the unclean and the clean,

Eze 44:23 "Moreover, they shall teach My people the difference between the holy and the profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean.

Job 14:4 "Who can make the clean out of the unclean? No one!

****

Mar 7:15-16 there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man. ["If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear."]

Mar 7:17 When he had left the crowd and entered the house, His disciples questioned Him about the parable.

Mar 7:18-23 And He *said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.) And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. "For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds of coveting and wickedness, as wellas deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. "All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man."

 

[seebs]

Sorry seebs, we need some BIBLE in here so that we don't miss the point:

Maybe we should use some discernment, and the guidance of the Spirit.

Where does this "good person" standard come from? My Bible tells me that there is nothing good about me, and that apart from Christ I can do nothing, that my very salvation is to His glory.

No. The Bible says that God's creation is good. Some human teachers wrongly claim that there is "nothing" good about people, by interpreting as literal fact claims of rhetoric and hyperbole.

 

[Buck72]

This post touched my heart it is so true.
I’m a fairly new Christian and when I say or do something that a conservative Christian does not like they usually get angry and throw a ton of scripture’s at you, get uptight then shun you, why are some of them so miserable? If you say something wrong why can’t they be more loving in their correction? I think most people will listen to them if they are.
My message to them is to stop throwing stones at people who make mistakes in life and start throwing a bit of love,compassion and understanding, that’s what I believe Jesus wants us to do.

Where do people get the idea that sharing the word of God is "throwing stones"?

I'm conservative and quite happy!!

I'm also intolerant of watered-down "feel good" doctrine that picks off the unpleasantness (sin, holiness, satan, hell, judgement, etc), calling it "complete".

If I foul up the truth of God by engaging in misuse of scripture, I expect my brothers/sisters to correct me with the word quickly! THAT IS THEIR DUTY!

Now many, myself included, are not perfect at doing so. But we all learn, one from another - that is why we are writing posts in this forum!

You'll get plenty of compassion from me, but I will not smile at sin, or the christian 'doctrine' that tells other believers that sin is okay (ie: Gene Robinson). That would be heresy, another unpleasantry of our faith, but a real issue that we have to deal with and not simply "wish away".

 

[seebs]

Seems Holiness is very much a part of the new testament code!!

"holiness code" is a term of art referring to the laws in Leviticus.

Do you consider it a grave sin to wear mixed fabrics, grow two kinds of food in one field, eat shellfish, or have a woman remain within a city of any sort during her period?

 

[seebs]

Where do people get the idea that sharing the word of God is "throwing stones"?

They don't. What's throwing stones is taking favorite prooftexts and bashing people with them. That's not sharing the word of God.

If you're not sure, try this simple test: Before you quote part of the Bible, read 1 Corinthians 13. Read it straight through, beginning to end.

After doing this, ask yourself; "is what I am about to do charitable?"

It will work wonders.

 

[Buck72]

Maybe we should use some discernment, and the guidance of the Spirit.

Who are "we" referring to that needs discernment? Sounds like the same run-around I find in the creation/evolution forums when Christians want to discredit the messenger regarding the message.

If the Bible verses I've shared do not mesh with the Spirit...show me the error and I will fix it immediately.

No. The Bible says that God's creation is good. Some human teachers wrongly claim that there is "nothing" good about people, by interpreting as literal fact claims of rhetoric and hyperbole.

Rom 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

I'm not talking about the Creation...of course the LORD said it was good, it was not spoiled by sin yet...what about "good people"? How can someone "be good"?

My Bible interpretation must be way off...in my Bible I see corruption in my heart, that only Christ can make clean, apart from Him, I am nothing.

Joh 15:5 "I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.

Rhetoric and hyperbole indeed. What Bible do you have?

 

[Buck72]

They don't. What's throwing stones is taking favorite prooftexts and bashing people with them. That's not sharing the word of God.

If you're not sure, try this simple test: Before you quote part of the Bible, read 1 Corinthians 13. Read it straight through, beginning to end.

After doing this, ask yourself; "is what I am about to do charitable?"

It will work wonders.

I've read it many times, GREAT chapter! I've been convicted many times too bro! We could all use a little more love.

BUT....

WHERE IS IT "UNLOVE" TO SHARE THE WORD OF TRUTH WHERE ERROR IS ABOUNDING?

Gal 4:16 So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?

 

[seebs]

Who are "we" referring to that needs discernment? Sounds like the same run-around I find in the creation/evolution forums when Christians want to discredit the messenger regarding the message.

The "we" that needs discernment is everyone.

If the Bible verses I've shared do not mesh with the Spirit...show me the error and I will fix it immediately.

If you recognize it, sure. You think anyone else here is any different?

The problem isn't when you can easily see how you've gone astray; the problem is when you're sure you haven't.

My Bible interpretation must be way off...in my Bible I see corruption in my heart, that only Christ can make clean, apart from Him, I am nothing.

To be corrupted, a thing must be good in nature; you cannot corrupt a thing which is already bad.

We are fallen, but not all the way. There is still that of God in each of us.

 

[seebs]

WHERE IS IT "UNLOVE" TO SHARE THE WORD OF TRUTH WHERE ERROR IS ABOUNDING?

Consider, if you will, the question of the way in which you share the truth.

Are you, when you do this, possibly implying that you are a better person than those you correct? If so, that's not especially loving.

Are you implying that they are stupid? Are you implying that they are willful in their misunderstanding, rather than honest but fallible?

These are just some of the many ways to be unloving in saying truth.

Humility is very important.

 

[oworm]

Ok............"scripture bashing" is not what my motives are when i quote scripture for the sole purpose of seeking to realign peoples perception of a given subject ( in this case holiness). if i was "bashing" i would be adding my own interpretation of the quoted texts. I dont do that ,but rather keep my comments to a minimum and let God speak for himself through what has been written in his word. Its up to the recipient to further study this and come to their own conclusion.

As for my attutude when quoting,it certainly is not out of hate or for the purpose "bringing somone down". Nor does it come from an attitude of "holier than thou" .
Based on my own past experience of being steeped in sinful practices and rebellion against God im only too aware of my own sinfullness and bias toward sin.
I have nothing but love in my heart for my brothers and sisters in Christ and want nothing less than Gods best for them,even at the expense being lambasted for my quotes or sayings.
The truth is that the church today is in an abysmal state and isnt being seen to be "apart" from the world in that it is forced to adopt a tolerant attitude.

My own conviction is that liberalsim and conservatism have become like to boxers in a ring, poles apart!!
There needs to be a "comeng together"
In seeking to distance themselves from each others theology BOTH sides have lost

 

[seebs]

I agree, oworm. I think there's a lot of hostility and misunderstanding which serves neither God nor Man.

I don't in general think that the Bible, when quoted in little snippets, speaks for itself; I think in general such texts are uninformative and potentially misleading. But, that's just me; your intent is clearly honest. I do prefer longer quotes, I think they give a better feel for the material.

 

[Buck72]

Consider, if you will, the question of the way in which you share the truth.

Are you, when you do this, possibly implying that you are a better person than those you correct? If so, that's not especially loving.

Are you implying that they are stupid? Are you implying that they are willful in their misunderstanding, rather than honest but fallible?

These are just some of the many ways to be unloving in saying truth.

Humility is very important.

FORGET THE MESSENGER...LOOK AT THE MESSAGE.

I'm not claiming anything about myself but that I'm a pardoned criminal in that I too have sinned against a HOLY GOD, been forgiven, shown the truth and now share that truth (THE WORD OF GOD) where needed. And it is needed EVERYWHERE.

If people in this forum take offense...well, why? If I'm wrong, I'm willing to be shown the error (humility). But I'm not claiming to be right, I'm claiming the word of God to be right, and it doesn't say what many people say its says, nor does it not say what many people say it doesn't say.

My response to them that take offense:

IF THE SHOE FITS....WEAR IT!

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

I think the problem is when people insist the shoe fits when they feel it doesn't.

Insisting Gene Robinson is wearing the "sinful lifestyle" shoe would be a case in point. He isn't offended by people telling him he's a filthy sinner because the shoe fits, but because it doesn't.

 

[Buck72]

I think the problem is when people insist the shoe fits when they feel it doesn't.

Insisting Gene Robinson is wearing the "sinful lifestyle" shoe would be a case in point. He isn't offended by people telling him he's a filthy sinner because the shoe fits, but because it doesn't.

Karl, God bless you -- I mean that.

I want you to know that I do not draw these conclusions of my own willfullness. These arguments are CRITICAL of the faith. To exclude the word of God, as has been done with Mr. Robinson's confirmation, is HERESY!

To say: "God says it is good" ~ when it is NOT good is to take upon oneself the mantle of Christ to speak words for God that He has not spoken.

In the OT vernacular that is a FALSE PROPHET - death penalty!!

Jer 14:14 Then the LORD said to me, "The prophets are prophesying falsehood in My name. I have neither sent them nor commanded them nor spoken to them; they are prophesying to you a false vision, divination, futility and the deception of their own minds.

Now, please examine the word with me brother and tell me if this is my conservative "bias", or if this really says what it says:

1Ti 3:1-7 This [is] a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 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.

Titus 1:5-16 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion. For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain, but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, just, devout, self-controlled, holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict. For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain. One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons." This testimony is true. For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith, not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth. To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled. They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed.

1Ti 1:8-11 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.

Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.

Rom 1:25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,

Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Rom 1:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips,

Rom 1:30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,

Rom 1:31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;

Rom 1:32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Lev 18:22 'You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

Lev 18:29 'For whoever does any of these abominations, those persons who do so shall be cut off from among their people.

*********************

Is there ANY support Biblically for a Gay Bishop? Anyone?......Bueller?

NO. THERE IS ZERO SUPPORT.

So what is the deal then? Do we just speak for God now that He is too out of touch with our new liberal society?

C'mon. I want to debate this Biblically, and if it can't be debated biblically - WHY IS IT YET AN ISSUE!!???

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

The debate of whether the Bible condemns all forms of homosexual behaviour has been done to death elsewhere at CF, and an important feature of it is that rarely does it result in a change of opinion.

The only thing we can agree on is that you say it does, and I say it doesn't. The difference is that I genuinely accept that you truly believe what you say you believe; I get the distinct impression that the conservatives think that we liberals "know" we're wrong but are unwilling to admit it. Mutual respect of different positions - that's all that's asked.

 

[Buck72]

The debate of whether the Bible condemns all forms of homosexual behaviour has been done to death elsewhere at CF, and an important feature of it is that rarely does it result in a change of opinion.

The only thing we can agree on is that you say it does, and I say it doesn't. The difference is that I genuinely accept that you truly believe what you say you believe; I get the distinct impression that the conservatives think that we liberals "know" we're wrong but are unwilling to admit it. Mutual respect of different positions - that's all that's asked.

What does it say then?

Gay Bishop, or no Gay Bishop?

I've backed up the side I've taken....c'mon guys where is your backup?

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

It doesn't say either. It leaves us to draw our own conclusions.

You conclude one way. I conclude another. I've posted the reasons many times on CF - I'll try to dig up one of the old debates because I really can't be arsed to go through it again.