What Kind of Cultural Behavior Would Make One of Your Beliefs Open to Listening?

[Dragons87]

This is a bit of an insult. I assume it was unintentional, and that your sentiment is that faith can help you overcome any distractions that may lead you astray. Your reference to "true Christians" indirectly implies that
people who left Christianity were not "true Christians," despite a belief in and a relationship with Jesus Christ, an adherance to Christian morality with various levels of orthodoxy, and generally doing things they perceived Christians around them doing. Stuff like praying, going to church, charitable and altruistic works, fall festivals, pancake breakfasts, all that sort of thing.

At some point, despite doing all the "Christian things," it didn't satisfy. There was a crisis of faith, possibly a Sisyphean one where they (generic they) did what everyone around them was doing, and it just wasn't happening. They considered themselves Christian and their peers considered them Christian. So what next?

I think some questions that should be considered are, why do some Christians make such a big deal about those who have "backslid", for want of a better term? and do other religions consider "backsliding" to such importance?

I think the opinion that "backsliders" were never Christian is not an attempt to be insulting or inflammatory. It is based on Jesus' promise, for example in John 6, that whosoever is in him will enjoy his presence in them. And Jesus being God, this presence should be so attractive that it would be impossible to fall away.

And having been a church-going Christian for much of my life, but only a Jesus-indwelt (i.e. "true") one for a couple of months, I can kind of understand both sides of the argument, in that I thought I was a Jesus-indwelt Christian when I was in fact only a church-going Christian.

But the difference between being a Jesus-indwelt Christian and church-going Christian is massive--it goes so far beyond belief. It is very stark, very personal and completely inexplicable with words (at least in my experience), which may account for a perceived amount of arrogance when presented in English on an online forum.

 

[JasperJackson]

Fantastic thread!

Thanks to the OP and thank you VERY much to all the respondents. As I was reading I kept thinking "guilty", "guilty". So, I will try to take these on board.

 

[b&wpac4]

But the difference between being a Jesus-indwelt Christian and church-going Christian is massive--it goes so far beyond belief. It is very stark, very personal and completely inexplicable with words (at least in my experience), which may account for a perceived amount of arrogance when presented in English on an online forum.

Don't forget that as deeply as you feel this, and as much as you know you are correct, others feel the exact same way about their beliefs.

 

[aman4god]

If you state facts and tell it from your heart you wont go wrong. Pray and god will lead you. You cant go wrong with him on your side.

 

[Dragons87]

Don't forget that as deeply as you feel this, and as much as you know you are correct, others feel the exact same way about their beliefs.

Of course. I only proposed my own experience for your pleasure. You may take or not take whatever you want from it.

 

[b&wpac4]

Of course. I only proposed my own experience for your pleasure. You may take or not take whatever you want from it.

I would never try to take that away from you at all! My only point is that many, many people seem to think that others are "faking" or whatever.

 

[Dragons87]

I would never try to take that away from you at all! My only point is that many, many people seem to think that others are "faking" or whatever.

Haha. It's tempting to call into question whether people who are making those claims are simply "church-going Christians" instead of "Jesus-indwelt" ones.

But I won't.

It's not for me to judge anyway.

 

[b&wpac4]

Haha. It's tempting to call into question whether people who are making those claims are simply "church-going Christians" instead of "Jesus-indwelt" ones.

Actually, I meant in relation to other religions.

 

[Fuzzy]

And having been a church-going Christian for much of my life, but only a Jesus-indwelt (i.e. "true") one for a couple of months, I can kind of understand both sides of the argument, in that I thought I was a Jesus-indwelt Christian when I was in fact only a church-going Christian.

But the difference between being a Jesus-indwelt Christian and church-going Christian is massive--it goes so far beyond belief. It is very stark, very personal and completely inexplicable with words (at least in my experience), which may account for a perceived amount of arrogance when presented in English on an online forum.

I'm genuinely happy that your faith and relationship with Jesus enrich your life.

It is very personal, and also very, very subjective (in my opinion). You stated that you thought for a long time you were in-dwelt, then your stance changed. Others (from their subjective points of view) may perceive themselves as being in-dwelt as well. Others may subjectively recognize their stance as just church-going and want more, or may be satisfied with just that. Still others (and I'm not saying this is better) may
want that "in-dwelt" feeling, but their search leads them somewhere over there instead of here.


I apologize if the next part is offensive.

Faith and belief are, in my opinion, not readily or easily measured things. There are trappings that may signify one's path, such as certain articles of clothing or what day you engage in ritual services, but faith and belief are inside.

 

[Dragons87]

I'm genuinely happy that your faith and relationship with Jesus enrich your life.

It is very personal, and also very, very subjective (in my opinion). You stated that you thought for a long time you were in-dwelt, then your stance changed. Others (from their subjective points of view) may perceive themselves as being in-dwelt as well. Others may subjectively recognize their stance as just church-going and want more, or may be satisfied with just that. Still others (and I'm not saying this is better) may
want that "in-dwelt" feeling, but their search leads them somewhere over there instead of here.

Certainly. Every person's life is different.

I apologize if the next part is offensive.

Faith and belief are, in my opinion, not readily or easily measured things. There are trappings that may signify one's path, such as certain articles of clothing or what day you engage in ritual services, but faith and belief are inside.

It isn't offensive, and on the whole that is what I think too.

 

[Gardenia]

But the difference between being a Jesus-indwelt Christian and church-going Christian is massive--it goes so far beyond belief. It is very stark, very personal and completely inexplicable with words (at least in my experience), which may account for a perceived amount of arrogance when presented in English on an online forum.

I think it's for those reasons that it's usually not something you'd want to bring up in a conversation with someone - especially when you may not know the person well at all. I understand that some Christians believe that those who left Christianity weren't 'true Christians,' but it may not be the best thing to say when you're trying to get an open conversation going. It's a bit of a dismissive statement, and it can make the other person feel as if they're not really being listened to. Now, the speaker may have not meant any such insult, and it's impossible to always avoid offending someone, but there are some things which can be left unsaid which may help.

 

[Dragons87]

I think it's for those reasons that it's usually not something you'd want to bring up in a conversation with someone - especially when you may not know the person well at all. I understand that some Christians believe that those who left Christianity weren't 'true Christians,' but it may not be the best thing to say when you're trying to get an open conversation going. It's a bit of a dismissive statement, and it can make the other person feel as if they're not really being listened to. Now, the speaker may have not meant any such insult, and it's impossible to always avoid offending someone, but there are some things which can be left unsaid which may help.

Certainly. When faced with "backsliders" whom I don't know I now simply ask questions about what happened, and see if the other side is happy to discuss the past. Who am I to judge, anyway?

On the other hand, this is an open forum, and whatever is said in the author's own choice. If one doesn't want something to be commented on, in whatever fashion, one doesn't have to post a certain thing.

 

[CRfan]

I was not intending to say that people aren't sincere in thinking they were really Christians.
I'm basing what I am saying on the Bible about the enduring nature of saving faith. There are some true believers that have a period of struggle, but they will ultimately come back.
1 John 2:19
"They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us."
John 10:28
"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand."

I also have thought about the parable of the seeds, so I realize that it can look or feel like someone is a Christian. It's just that God didn't prepare the soil and they have no root. So, a person can call themselves a Christian, but if God hasn't changed their heart and the Spirit has not indwelt them they were not true Christians...guess some would just say they were "nominal Christians."

As a Christian, my conviction is not just coming from my own mind, but from the Holy Spirit. So, what I believe is not just from my own feelings.

Romans 8:16
"The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God," ...

The Bible says salvation is from God. So, a person can't be a Christian one moment and not a Christian the next. God does the work of saving, and it's complete. I am not saved by works.
You might be familiar with Ephesians 2:8,9.
Also, the verse about He who began a good work in you will be faithful to complete it.
Anyway, I seemed to have stirred up a lot of response in ways I didn't expect.
I think instead of communicating privately, I think that it might be a nice idea for people to have individual threads about themselves where people can ask questions about a person to do with background, etc. I've learned to be a bit cautious with online people, but I don't mean to be offensive by saying that. Individual threads started by a person who so chooses would still be personal. What do others think?

The Bible says the Gospel is an offense, so in some cases people's arguments are not with me personally but with God's Word.
I was really thinking of cultural offenses mostly when I started this thread, but I did take a risk by broadening it a bit. I found other responses to be enlightening though.

 

[b&wpac4]

As a Christian, my conviction is not just coming from my own mind, but from the Holy Spirit. So, what I believe is not just from my own feelings.

I have oddly found that over 50% of the time, the Holy Spirit agrees with exactly what the Christian thought before. Nobody has ever been able to explain to me why there are so many sects with the Holy Spirit around either. It would be a giant boost to Christianity if the Holy Spirit would bring all of you together.

 

[Fuzzy]

I also have thought about the parable of the seeds, so I realize that it can look or feel like someone is a Christian. It's just that God didn't prepare the soil and they have no root. So, a person can call themselves a Christian, but if God hasn't changed their heart and the Spirit has not indwelt them they were not true Christians...guess some would just say they were "nominal Christians."

So...it's up to God to decide who is virtuous and true?
Can you prove that God has not changed their heart?
How do you know God's guidance and grace is absent from their lives?

I think instead of communicating privately, I think that it might be a nice idea for people to have individual threads about themselves where people can ask questions about a person to do with background, etc. I've learned to be a bit cautious with online people, but I don't mean to be offensive by saying that. Individual threads started by a person who so chooses would still be personal. What do others think?

That would be a bit, for lack of a better word, spammy. And might be construed as the promotion of non-Christian religion. This board is for discussion. Which is best done with a spectrum of opinions.

The Bible says the Gospel is an offense, so in some cases people's arguments are not with me personally but with God's Word.
I was really thinking of cultural offenses mostly when I started this thread, but I did take a risk by broadening it a bit. I found other responses to be enlightening though.

All right.
Slavery. Rape. Incest. Polygamy. All things that happen within the Bible, with acceptance and encouragement, and that many modern cultures frown upon to varying degrees. Are those cultures arguing against God?
Did God do a thing that we (generic we) don't quite grok?

 

[Eudaimonist]

If you state facts and tell it from your heart you wont go wrong. Pray and god will lead you. You cant go wrong with him on your side.

Actually, this could easily go wrong. Taken literally, it leads to monologues instead of discussions. This is an instant turn-off.

Naturally, you must bring something to the table in any discussion, and you should state what you believe to be true, and speak from the heart. But there is far more to a discussion than this.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

Fantastic thread!

Thanks to the OP and thank you VERY much to all the respondents. As I was reading I kept thinking "guilty", "guilty". So, I will try to take these on board.

It's impressive that you are asking and paying such close attention to our feedback. I'm sure that you'll do great.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[CRfan]

My idea was of a thread where people can ask about a person (and it would probably be even better and less intimidating to make it a thread where it isn't focused just on one individual) to find out more where people are coming from. I think that is in keeping with discussing spirituality and religions as the forum is about...and it doesn't have to promote. I mean say, a person says they are a pagan or a Jew or whatever. Well, I'm sure there are different kinds, and I think it would be interesting to know about that and what different beliefs people have held in their lifetime.

On the one subject, all people who are actually Christians have the Spirit...and are one in the Lord.

As far as incest goes, Leviticus 20:11-12 shows that God doesn't condone incest.
Deuteronomy 22:25-29 shows that God doesn't condone rape.
1 Timothy 3:2 and verse 12 mentions about leaders being the husband of one wife...they were to be examples to the rest of the church.
Genesis 2:24 mentions wife singularly. This was God's first design for marriage. Matthew 19:5-6 says the same thing and mentions they are no longer two, but one flesh.
Ephesians 5:22-33 indicates one wife.
I have read that slavery in the Bible was more a contracted employment idea rather that what we think of as slavery today. There were abuses, and that is why there were instructions of how they were to be treated and to treat their masters.
It's sort of a picture like people being a slave to sin, but actually slavery to Christ is true freedom. He cares for and loves us, and it is a privilege to serve Him.

Well, this has gotten a bit off track. I think I have gotten a little bit of an idea about people, but please forgive me if I can't remember who is who.

 

[Fuzzy]

On the one subject, all people who are actually Christians have the Spirit...and are one in the Lord.

You might want to look at the "True Scotsman" fallacy.

As far as incest goes, Leviticus 20:11-12 shows that God doesn't condone incest.
Deuteronomy 22:25-29 shows that God doesn't condone rape.

These occur after Genesis, which contained what we "modern folk," or more specifically "modern culture" as per your OP might consider to be incestuous relations. To wit: Lot and his daughters, Abraham and Sarah (half siblings), or repopulating the earth from the four married couples on the Ark. Those couples were Noah and his wife, their three biological sons, and the wives of those sons. The next generation on mature couples would be at least as close as cousins.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24 is adultery (since she was betrothed, and didn't cry out). 22:25-28 assumes rape, since no one could potentially have heard her if she cried out. 22:29 covers what to do if someone rapes an unbetrothed virgin. Which is that he pays her family money, marries her, and they can't get divorced. Marrying the guy who raped your virginity away.

There's a whole lot of stuff about what to do with female prisoners of war.

1 Timothy 3:2 and verse 12 mentions about leaders being the husband of one wife...they were to be examples to the rest of the church.
Genesis 2:24 mentions wife singularly. This was God's first design for marriage. Matthew 19:5-6 says the same thing and mentions they are no longer two, but one flesh.

Abraham with Sarah's handmaid.
Solomon and several hundred wives.
Deuteronomy 21 is all about inheritance laws for children of different wives.

I have read that slavery in the Bible was more a contracted employment idea rather that what we think of as slavery today.

Leviticus 25. Not only can you buy slaves from the heathens (who, if we look back at who was left after the Flood, are distant cousins), you can pass them on as property to your children.

It's sort of a picture like people being a slave to sin, but actually slavery to Christ is true freedom. He cares for and loves us, and it is a privilege to serve Him.

I wish you a long and happy life on your path.

Well, this has gotten a bit off track.

But it's still relevant, since we're discussing what modern cultures find acceptable, in comparison with what ancient cultures found acceptable.

 

[Gardenia]

(and it would probably be even better and less intimidating to make it a thread where it isn't focused just on one individual) to find out more where people are coming from. I think that is in keeping with discussing spirituality and religions as the forum is about...and it doesn't have to promote. I mean say, a person says they are a pagan or a Jew or whatever. Well, I'm sure there are different kinds, and I think it would be interesting to know about that and what different beliefs people have held in their lifetime.

We've had a few threads kinda like that before. Normally they're threads made by a person of a faith called called "ask a pagan" or "ask an atheist" or whatever, where people of that particular belief answer questions from others. Or you see threads like "a few questions for Hindus" etc. There are a few around, or you could start a new one. Normally they're pretty informative threads.