Relativism in Christianity

[beli]

I guess the argument before God is: do any of us deserve our lives?

Some of the things you say scare me.

 

[speedracer]

It scares me too, but I think nbcrusader is on point here. Cf. Romans 6:23.

 

[nbcrusader]

Isn't that what was done?

Isn't the Old Testament God somewhat tainted by the view of the "CHOSEN" people?

Was the plague sent by God to wipe out their enemies?

If you treat the Bible as literature, then you have a strong argument here.

The Puritains believed that God did this to the Native Americans here in MAssachusetts. He "cleared" the land for them so they could settle.

They fashioned their own belief about God.

Self-declared divine providence is always a problem.

 

[BVS]

If you treat the Bible as literature, then you have a strong argument here.



Self-declared divine providence is always a problem.

How is one self declared and not the other, just because one's written in the Bible?

 

[Dreadsox]

So God changed and became everyones God when?

If he was not the "God" of the Egyptians, how would you expect an Egyptian to convert to Christianity if we believe the Old testament to be correct, that God did horrible things to them?

 

[deep]

If he was not the "God" of the Egyptians, how would you expect an Egyptian to convert ....

Could that be why he sent Mohammed?

A more user-friendly faith for the people you speak of.

 

[Dreadsox]

Wouldn't eliminating the "THESISM" that Spong speaks of make it easier to convert people?

 

[shrmn8rpoptart]

Something I want to point out is this.

Martin Luther, when writing his 95 theses used the Bible as his foundation. Spong pulls from many sources. I think that says something as well.

this may have been the most fantastic statement that has ever been made on these boards! in the words of avalanche play by play man peter mcnabb "THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!"

it says a whole lot! it says that luther realized that God had revealed himself to us in his Word. it says that the changes luther envisioned were changes to bring the church back in line Biblically. he saw that the church had diverted from the Word, and needed to be set back on the right track.

spong on the other hand, sees that the church is out of step with the rest of the world (which it should be!) and consults his own thoughts and feelings, and science (though he only makes broad references to science [read c.s. lewis's miracles, and you'll find he argues that science does not preclude the existence of God]). he basically discounts whatever in the Bible does not fit into his world view, and bends other passages to make them fit. the church should not be conformed to the ways of the world!

here's what Christ says about the relationship of disciples to the world: "if you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. as it is, you do not belong to the world. that is why the world hates you." john 15:19. in john 16:11 Christ calls satan the "prince of the world" and says that he is condemned. obviously it is not desirable for a Christian to conform himself to the ways of the world, its very prince is condemned, as so are all of his subjects. however, if one follows Christ, the world will hate them and persecute them.

my final thoughts on spong. he is an angry bitter man. his massive ego prevents him from thinking clearly. he finds himself unable to believe in God, and therefor is of the opinion that if he can't believe it, no one else should either. his basic premise is that Christians should became atheists, but still call themselves Christians, and this is how Christianity will be saved.

 

[Dreadsox]

You have met Bishop Spong? You know him to be an angry bitter man how?

Why? Becasue he dares challenge dogma?

AS I said earlier in the thread, I do not agree with his stance in the area of these twelve things, but dang it all, I am not so stubborn to not recognize there is some truth to his comments.

 

[shrmn8rpoptart]

So God changed and became everyones God when?

If he was not the "God" of the Egyptians, how would you expect an Egyptian to convert to Christianity if we believe the Old testament to be correct, that God did horrible things to them?

he was certainly not the God of the egyptians, if only by the fact that they rejected Him. they did not acknowledge the God of the israelites, they refused to worship Him, and they worshipped their own Gods. he was not the "God" of the egyptians, because they didn't want him to be!

 

[Dreadsox]

So God is not your God if you reject him?

If you believe God to be the creator of all, he is indeed their God if they reject him or not.

 

[shrmn8rpoptart]

You have met Bishop Spong? You know him to be an angry bitter man how?

Why? Becasue he dares challenge dogma?

AS I said earlier in the thread, I do not agree with his stance in the area of these twelve things, but dang it all, I am not so stubborn to not recognize there is some truth to his comments.

this is how ex-bishop spong presents himself in his writings. he does more than challenge dogma, he throws out the basic tenents of faith laid out by Christ.

 

[Dreadsox]

Right.....

And how many of Bishop Spongs books have you read in their entirety to come this conclusion?

 

[Dreadsox]

this is how ex-bishop spong presents himself in his writings. he does more than challenge dogma, he throws out the basic tenents of faith laid out by Christ.

Well, please, deal with every one of the twelve points, and show me how Christ layed them out.

I am open minded.

LOL....ex Bishop....um...ok

 

[shrmn8rpoptart]

So God is not your God if you reject him?

If you believe God to be the creator of all, he is indeed their God if they reject him or not.

yep. that's what i said. of course he is their creator. he provides the very things for them that make their life possible, and they refuse to acknowledge his existence. they DON"T WANT GOD and in the end, God gives them what they want.

 

[shrmn8rpoptart]

LOL....ex Bishop....um...ok

he's not a bishop anymore...

 

[Dreadsox]

yep. that's what i said. of course he is their creator. he provides the very things for them that make their life possible, and they refuse to acknowledge his existence. they DON"T WANT GOD and in the end, God gives them what they want.

have you been baptized?

 

[BVS]

yep. that's what i said. of course he is their creator. he provides the very things for them that make their life possible, and they refuse to acknowledge his existence. they DON"T WANT GOD and in the end, God gives them what they want.

That doesn't sound like the Prodical Son story I remember. The story I remember is that the father was always the father no matter how far his son strayed.

 

[Dreadsox]

Shoot...no offense my friend....glad to see you post...but I asked a simple question and no answer...LOL

 

[thacraic]

it says a whole lot! it says that luther realized that God had revealed himself to us in his Word. it says that the changes luther envisioned were changes to bring the church back in line Biblically. he saw that the church had diverted from the Word, and needed to be set back on the right track.

spong on the other hand, sees that the church is out of step with the rest of the world (which it should be!) and consults his own thoughts and feelings, and science (though he only makes broad references to science [read c.s. lewis's miracles, and you'll find he argues that science does not preclude the existence of God]). he basically discounts whatever in the Bible does not fit into his world view, and bends other passages to make them fit. the church should not be conformed to the ways of the world!

here's what Christ says about the relationship of disciples to the world: "if you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. as it is, you do not belong to the world. that is why the world hates you." john 15:19. in john 16:11 Christ calls satan the "prince of the world" and says that he is condemned. obviously it is not desirable for a Christian to conform himself to the ways of the world, its very prince is condemned, as so are all of his subjects. however, if one follows Christ, the world will hate them and persecute them.

Hiya shrmn8rpoptart,

You are welcome lol! But my stating that was, because lately I have been thinking how some people have very little problem quoting "learned scholars" in reference to all things spiritual. Yet when it comes to the Bible they are willing to discount what some, most or all of it says because their arguement is that "the Bible is written by man". So the logic is this - the Bible can not be used to fully understand God because it was "written by MAN", but "profound insight" given to us by a MAN who is basing his reasoning on many sources is perfectly acceptable?

When I read Spong's theses and the text leading up to it, it occurred to me "Wait a minute, let me go look at Luther's 95 theses." When I did, I was like oh yeh ok, I get it. Luther used the Bible. Spong did not.

You put it so well in regards to Luther. He had the Truth on his side and in turn we saw what happened as a result. And not only did he want to bring the church back in lines biblically, he wanted to bring the Bible to everyone. He felt that EVERYONE had a right to read God's Word. Now mind you Luther was only a man and he had his flaws (as we all do) but God used Him and Luther was willing. Out of all Luther's accomplishments, I think that is the one which stands out the most and the one which we can all learn the most from.

The Scriptures you pointed out are spot on. Nothing more to say to that other than Amen.

Take care,

Carrie

 

[thacraic]

Could that be why he sent Mohammed?

A more user-friendly faith for the people you speak of.

Sorry, I know it was just a flippant remark but....

Christ was introduced to Egypt 500 years before Mohammed was born and over time was viewed as "user-friendly" by the Egyptians. Egyptian Christians were persecuted by Rome for nearly 300 years up until Christianity was no longer illegal.

 

[A_Wanderer]

And since that time Islam has done a very good job and driving Christian, Animist, Zoroastrian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist etc. religious practices out of conquered lands through conversion, dhimmitude and extermination - make no mistake religions have always been a tool of conquest and Islam is up there with the best of them when it comes to fighting for peoples souls. Part of the reason I am very suspicious of religious practices is because they are built on a foundation of control and obedience, something that in my humble opinion can make us indifferent to our own humanity.

 

[indra]

Isn't that what was done?

Isn't the Old Testament God somewhat tainted by the view of the "CHOSEN" people?

Was the plague sent by God to wipe out their enemies?

The Puritains believed that God did this to the Native Americans here in MAssachusetts. He "cleared" the land for them so they could settle.

They fashioned their own belief about God.

I agree. But I would take it even further. Isn't believing that the god you worship is "the one true God" the epitome of making god in your own image? That you can't even consider that the gods worshiped by others might be either also "true" gods or the same god under a different guise?

 

[Dreadsox]

Interestingly enough I have tremendous respect for Luthor and for Spong.

Luthor correctly translated corinthians that we were debating in the other thread.

Anyways......My question was not answered by Poptart.

thacraic have you been baptized?

 

[thacraic]

Hiya Dread,

Yes I have been baptized. But that is not where my salvation lies. I was saved at a very young age. It was after I came to know the Lord that I was baptized. It was, as my church called it, a public profession of faith. My internal baptism occurred when I accepted Christ as my savior. My external baptism came after the fact.

There are many people that get baptized just to go through the motions, do it because they are "supposed" to, or becaue they think that it will save them. There are many people that believe because they were baptized (or christened even) as an infant that they are somehow saved by that.

Baptism in itself is a statement of faith. It is saying I now know the Lord as my Savoir and as a result I want to follow Him in every way. Jesus was baptized so in my getting baptized I was saying "hey I want to do this so I can be more like Him."

If I elected never to be baptized (dunked in water - baptism pool, river, or creek) that would have absolutely no effect on my salvation and/or relationship with God. The moment He entered my heart, I was baptized by the Spirit, and washed in the Blood. So any external baptism in front of man was only to show I had no shame in having a new found relationship with Christ.

Hope this answered your question?

Take Care,

Carrie

 

[thacraic]

And since that time Islam has done a very good job and driving Christian, Animist, Zoroastrian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist etc. religious practices out of conquered lands through conversion, dhimmitude and extermination - make no mistake religions have always been a tool of conquest and Islam is up there with the best of them when it comes to fighting for peoples souls. Part of the reason I am very suspicious of religious practices is because they are built on a foundation of control and obedience, something that in my humble opinion can make us indifferent to our own humanity.

I completely agree with you on your sentiment in respect to religious practices. Jesus would agree as well (except for the humanity part).

Take care,

Carrie

 

[thacraic]

I agree. But I would take it even further. Isn't believing that the god you worship is "the one true God" the epitome of making god in your own image? That you can't even consider that the gods worshiped by others might be either also "true" gods or the same god under a different guise?

Hiya indra,

If that were the case then God would not have said in the Ten Commandments not to put any other God's before Him and Jesus never would I have said " I am the way, the truth and the life, no one come to the Father except through me." Jesus didn't say I am A way, A truth, A life... He said THE.... using a very definitve article.

So that leads to ask, what are we to do? Discount what God says in regards to Himself so we can accomodate everyone's views? That is at the core of realtivism.

Take care,

Carrie

 

[Dreadsox]

Hope this answered your question?

So sacrament Babptism is dependant on the person chosing to be Baptized?

 

[Dreadsox]

I agree. But I would take it even further. Isn't believing that the god you worship is "the one true God" the epitome of making god in your own image? That you can't even consider that the gods worshiped by others might be either also "true" gods or the same god under a different guise?

I believe it is possible.

 

[Dreadsox]

Hiya indra,

If that were the case then God would not have said in the Ten Commandments not to put any other God's before Him and Jesus never would I have said " I am the way, the truth and the life, no one come to the Father except through me." Jesus didn't say I am A way, A truth, A life... He said THE.... using a very definitve article.

So that leads to ask, what are we to do? Discount what God says in regards to Himself so we can accomodate everyone's views? That is at the core of realtivism.

Take care,

Carrie

He was the way the truth and the life for the Jewish tradition. If Christ had walked into the middle of Africa and said those words they would not have meant diddly to them. In the context of Christ trying to reclaim the temple, the true intent of the "law" he is the way the truth and the life.