What Is Liberal Christianity? - Page 5

RubySera_Martin · 08-18-2006, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustifiedByFaith

Dear All,

As I contemplate the overall direction that the church is traveling, I see the word "grace" and actions of grace being mis-used. There are very clear quidelines in the scriptures regarding men & woman in the church and homosexuality. In my opinion, for a congregation to even "consider" ordaining a homosexual pastor is in my opinion "apostacy" at it's highest degree. I am afraid that in the name of "getting along at all costs" or as some might call this "liberalism" , we as christians are dropping some of the basic essentials that "unify" and "separate" us from the ways of the world. We are appearing to be more and more like the world itself.

I just disagree with your ideas, Justified. I think God created all of us and the entire universe. If God creates homosexuals then who are we to reject their full humanity. No, I think being part of God's world and humanity is a very good thing.

RubySera_Martin · 08-18-2006, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wil

I fall back on the two commandments...the two Old Testament Jewish Commandments, that Jesus as a Jew correctly answered as the most important.

They don't imply that it is ours to judge or condemn or worry ourselves constantly with what others do. They tell us what we are to do, and they are fairly clear.

Wil, I enjoy your cheerful presence on here. I also agree whole-heartedly with your idea of not taking the Bible too literally. For example, if we feel a distaste for homosexuality we can sure find scripture to support our opinion. If we feel an aversion to owning a driver's license and automobile we can sure find scripture to support and justify our feeling. And I know whole faith communities that feel such aversions. They can point out every passage in the Bible warning against driving an automobile.

When I left the horse and buggy community where I was born I joined a much more liberal church. That church is seen by the horse and buggy people as totally lost to the world. What really makes me scream is when THEY ("worldly church") talk about keeping separation with the world.

I just threw the whole separationist garbage out the window. "The world" is not people who own certain technologies or who discard certain so-called biblical ordinances; it's one's dominant society. If one is born into a closed community that is distinct from the rest of the country in dress, language, laws and lifestyle, then that community IS dominant society for that person.

The Bible says to "come out from among them." And I did. So you see, Justified, one specific interpretation of the Bible is not universally applicable or correct. BTW, there are also commands in the Bible against using the internet. I don't know what they are but I've been told my former community has rules against using it and I know it's not the only community with such restrictions.

Thus, the Bible very clearly states for Christians not to drive cars and not to use the internet, two things you probably do every day. How do you decide which rules to take literally? This is a serious question to which I would appreciate an answer. I've asked it of conservative Christians before and they always avoid answering it.

Liberal Christianity has room for such diversity of thought. While liberal Christians are obligated to be tolerant of conservative Christians they do not feel obligated in the least to accept the literal biblical interpretations against issues like the ordination of otherwise qualified persons just because of how they practice sex or because they happen to have female bodies.

JustifiedByFaith · 08-18-2006, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

I just disagree with your ideas, Justified. I think God created all of us and the entire universe. If God creates homosexuals then who are we to reject their full humanity. No, I think being part of God's world and humanity is a very good thing.

Dear RubySera,

I think you completely missed my point regarding homosexuals. Please read my post again.

RubySera_Martin · 08-18-2006, 06:03 PM

Justified, I read your post again. Probably I am missing something but I can't find what it is. If you want me to know I guess you will have to tell me.

Ruby

JustifiedByFaith · 08-18-2006, 06:08 PM

Dear Ruby,

It was "specifically" concerning "identified professing" homosexuals in positions of authority within the church. >pastors, elders, deacons... for example.

RubySera_Martin · 08-18-2006, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustifiedByFaith

Dear Ruby,

It was "specifically" concerning "identified professing" homosexuals in positions of authority within the church. >pastors, elders, deacons... for example.

That's what I figured. My position doesn't change.

JustifiedByFaith · 08-18-2006, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RubySera_Martin

That's what I figured. My position doesn't change.

Dear RubySera_Martin,

Fair enough. To continue on this topic would be another thread...

flowperson · 08-18-2006, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustifiedByFaith

Dear lunamoth,

Great. Let's assume that flow has answered the thread question. thank you Flow.

JBF:

Sorry I went off on a toot, but that happens sometimes in heated discussions. If forgiveness is divine... then the discussions on this thread will require some divinity ( no not the white fudge that melts in your mouth) from each of us from time to time. But then, isn't that what Christians are supposed to be about ?
Thanks Luna !

All:
As far as using post #2 as a guideline definition regarding Liberal Christianity, remember that the gist of my thinking was that ALL things change in time, including us. So additions, deletions, modifications will ALWAYS be necessary as things go along. But how to keep track of agreements/ disagreements/changes? If we are forming some sort of community here on this issue, then do we even worry about stuff like that?

BTW, my overall view about all of this and the violent turmoil of the 20th century is that Jesus was a herald of what was to come in the distant future. That there would be a third sort of human born into the human race eventually with attributes similar to His, and He was sent here to help condition us to believe the necesssary concepts that would render this sort of person more acceptable to the two types of humans that have been here from the very beginning. I've done a lot of textual research on this concept, and there is quite a bit of information out there that seems to justify it.

Comments?

flow....

JustifiedByFaith · 08-18-2006, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flowperson

JBF:

Sorry I went off on a toot, but that happens sometimes in heated discussions. If forgiveness is divine... then the discussions on this thread will require some divinity ( no not the white fudge that melts in your mouth) from each of us from time to time. But then, isn't that what Christians are supposed to be about ?

Thanks Luna !

flow....

Dear Luna,

Your just fine,...I never felt any heat. We all perceive conversation in different ways right?

lunamoth · 08-18-2006, 10:52 PM

Thanks guys.

luna

RubySera_Martin · 08-19-2006, 05:18 AM

Flow, I confess that your Post 68 goes over my head. What do you see as the two types of humanity that have existed from the beginning?

flowperson · 08-19-2006, 02:03 PM

Rock people and tree people.

flow....

Quahom1 · 08-19-2006, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flowperson

Rock people and tree people.

flow....

(chuckle)

RubySera_Martin · 08-19-2006, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flowperson

BTW, my overall view about all of this and the violent turmoil of the 20th century is that Jesus was a herald of what was to come in the distant future. That there would be a third sort of human born into the human race eventually with attributes similar to His, and He was sent here to help condition us to believe the necesssary concepts that would render this sort of person more acceptable to the two types of humans that have been here from the very beginning. I've done a lot of textual research on this concept, and there is quite a bit of information out there that seems to justify it.

Comments?

flow....

Quote:

Ruby said:

What do you see as the two types of humanity that have existed from the beginning?

Quote:

Flow said:

Rock people and tree people.

So I guess you don't want me to know what you're talking about and your call for comments was a joke.

Dondi · 08-19-2006, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flowperson

JBF:

Sorry I went off on a toot, but that happens sometimes in heated discussions. If forgiveness is divine... then the discussions on this thread will require some divinity ( no not the white fudge that melts in your mouth) from each of us from time to time. But then, isn't that what Christians are supposed to be about ?
Thanks Luna !

All:
As far as using post #2 as a guideline definition regarding Liberal Christianity, remember that the gist of my thinking was that ALL things change in time, including us. So additions, deletions, modifications will ALWAYS be necessary as things go along. But how to keep track of agreements/ disagreements/changes? If we are forming some sort of community here on this issue, then do we even worry about stuff like that?

BTW, my overall view about all of this and the violent turmoil of the 20th century is that Jesus was a herald of what was to come in the distant future. That there would be a third sort of human born into the human race eventually with attributes similar to His, and He was sent here to help condition us to believe the necesssary concepts that would render this sort of person more acceptable to the two types of humans that have been here from the very beginning. I've done a lot of textual research on this concept, and there is quite a bit of information out there that seems to justify it.

Comments?

flow....

I would be most appreciative if you would expound on the idea of a third human type. If you believe that the first two human types are male and female, would the third type be some kind of conglomeration of the first two? I think we have this already...they are called hermaphrodites.