Christian Dopers Thread

Great Debates
121

Concerning Christianity being the “only way,” I can only repeat what Christ himself had to say, which was pretty plain:

“I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me.” (paraphrased from memory, but probably very close to the NIV or Living Bible translation)

Basically, if you are to be a Christian, and reconciled to God the Father, then you must accept Christ. Now, if you want to be one with Allah, or Gaea, or whatever-other-god-you-choose (including NO god), then that’s YOUR business; Christ wasn’t the atonement for those “deities.”

For me, acceptance of Christ and what it takes to be a “Christian” is summed up quite adequately in the Apostles’ creed, that you have to believe in:
-God the Father
-Jesus Christ, the Son of God
-Born of the virgin, Mary
-Was crucified, dead and buried
-Resurrected on the 3rd day
-Resides at the right hand of God the Father
(can’t remember if the next part is an addendum or not)
-Sent the Holy Spirit in His stead until He returns

Naturally, there are those who question Christianity being the “one, true religion” but I think it is unique in that Christianity claims a resurrection after a death - and there’s never been a body to prove otherwise (yes, lack of evidence is not evidence, blah, blah, blah - articles of faith will never be able to be proven scientifically).

122

We can most certainly look offended when anyone shows such disrespect for our religion that they completely dismiss it as something ludicrous and fanciful.

Why is fundamentalism offensive to atheists and non-fundamentalists? Because it shows a completely lack of respect for any belief system other than their own. And yet, many atheists show a complete lack of respect for the beliefs of the spiritual or religious, and act as if this is completely acceptable behavior.

123

Can’t it be both? Agape / caritas expressed through “I love you guys” Woodstock-style love?

That’s a pleasant thought, and similar to my own thoughts on the matter.

Why is this a necessary step? Why must we choose to venerate Jesus and accept his death in this way?

As you said, he aimed to save the entire world. Why should Jesus care whether people acknowledge him for this or not? Surely he’d save us anyway. Not being facetious, merely don’t understand this concept.

I like that formulation. Could I have a cite for that - the original formulation of this belief, perhaps?

124

I have never thought that stating the truth is “politically incorrect.” I believe there are ways of speaking the truth that are sensitive to the feelings of others. Saying that one of your feet is smaller than the other is the same as saying that one of your feet is larger than the other. But one of them sounds a little kinder to the heart.

No one has been “run off” unless they have violated the rules and been banned by a moderator. We don’t have the power to do that. They must accept responsibility for their own actions just like the rest of us.

I have absolutely no desire to flame you, Vanilla. I’m still asking for forgiveness for calling Bill O’Reilly “pond scum” in another thread. Why would I want to take such a lamb to task?

I once believed as you do and over time my beliefs changed. About twenty years ago something happened that changed them, I think, irrevocably.

Being a Christian isn’t even about being “saved” anymore for me. I would believe in the divinity of Jesus and the wisdom of his teachings even if there were no promises of eternal life. And my thoughts on what eternal life may be like are quite different than they were thirty or forty years ago. In that respect, I have known “the peace that passeth understanding.”

Thank goodness neither of us has to be perfect. :wink:

125

Interesting. Did you ever think of looking at that quote “from memory” in context? The farthest thing from Jesus’s mind was in setting up a neat evangelical hurdle over which people needed to jump to get to know God.

It was in the context of His having announced that He was leaving the Apostles and that they knew the Way to the Father. It was reassurance.

But as usual, it makes a nice way to say “I’m OK and you’re not” for the neo-Pharisees. Who might take a good look at the Parable of the Sheep and Goats, because He was quite explicit what criteria He would use for judging there. Or at the other place where He defined criteria for judgment, Matthew 7:1-2.

On that note, I’m out of this thread.

If “being Christian” were a convenient way to exclude people from God’s grace, then I would want nothing to do with it. And it looks more and more like for most self-defined Christians, it is. :mad:

126

In Matthew 25, where Jesus is of course quoting from the “Old Testament”, the word used for ‘love’ is agape. Thus, it’s reasonable to assume that we are commanded to love in this sense God and our neighbour. Regarding God, I don’t think the problem arises - not many of us, I think, envisage God as a Woodstock-style character.

So, turning to our ‘neighbour’. Well, I don’t know about you, but the only time I get ‘I-love-you-guys’ with my acquaintances is when I’ve had a few too many! At such times, my protestations of love are hardly sincere and not, I think, what Jesus was thinking of.

The sort of thing that Jesus was thinking of is to me best expressed by James (4:17), where it is written: ‘Whoever knows what is right to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin’. Those times we could tell the truth to help our ‘neighbour’ (but harm our career), those times when we could praise the good work of a colleague but decide to keep silent because she seems to no longer be favoured by management. These are choices. Choosing to do the right and true thing in such circumstances is, I believe, agape.

The I-love-you-guys that we feel for our friends is something different (friendship, affection), and something beautiful. But it’s not what Jesus is talking about. And in relationships that are characterised by such feelings too, when they’re put to the test, it’s agape that will maintain them, or indeed restore them.

127

Roger, do you believe that seeking justice can be an expression of agape?

128

friend polycarp

i agree. jmho: jumping those evangelical hurdles makes it harder to get to know god.
lh

129

I cannot prove it while we are here on earth. Faith is required.
By the time I COULD prove it, it would be too late.

You don’t HAVE to believe it.

Millions of people don’t believe polka dotted elephants etc. and get martyred.

Salvation is a free gift(well, it cost Jesus, but).
If you reject it, its pretty much your decision and you suffer the consequneces.

130

Off the bat, I would say that seeking justice for another, especially where there is no likely reward for doing so - especially in terms of reputation - is definitely an instantiation of agape. Seeking justice for oneself - as I have done - I’m not so sure.

There is such a thing as love for justice and love for truth. Whether such “passion” needs to be chanelled towards the plight of others before you can call it agape, I really don’t know. But, for what it’s worth, I suspect so.

131

Roger, I ask because it seems to me that the social equivalent of love is justice – in whatever form it takes. I think it’s marvelous what you did.

132

“Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8) backs you up, I think, Zoe. And thanks - I’m still coming to terms with the sense of injustice I feel and the burn-out.

133

This is the crux of the matter, isn’t it? It’s a question which has been dividing Christians for years, and will probably continue to do so.

As some of you may be tired of reading, one of the finest people I know is a man who used to be a fundamentalist Christian (charistmatic Catholic, to be precise), was an atheist for several years, and is now a Wiccan. He’s also one of my dearest friends and, since we both like discussing religion, I know a bit about his spiritual journey. Concerning his becomeing an atheist, he told me at one point his thinking was there was no God because, “if there were, I’d have to hate him.” I’ve read similar things from some atheists around here. A year ago, I would have said it would take a major life crisis to turn him back into a Christian. Well, folks, he’s had one (a couple actually), and, if packing up the remnants of a 30 year marriage while a known devout Christian stands by his side packing up boxes and offering a shoulder to lean on won’t do it, I wouldn’t want him to be exposed to anything that would. It would hurt him too badly, and this is hurting him badly enough.

Some of you may remember Kirkland, a former member of this board. He was a gay man who made an honest attempt to convert to Christianity and became a Catholic for a while. Unfortunately, as I understand things, the constant condemnation of homosexuals and homosexuality by Christians drove him from Christianity.

I was lucky. Because the local Episcopal church was literally the one place in town where I could feel accepted and loved for who I was, I became and have stayed a devout Episcopalian. If I’d gone to my best friend’s Methodist church, where she was insulted for being stupid and handicapped within the church itself, I probably would have become as radical an anti-Christian as anyone I’ve seen here. I’ve been known to protest Christian hypocrisy here; if things had gone another way, I can see myself denouncing it loud and long with downright evangelical zeal.

Is God’s grace sufficient? If it was sufficient for a lost, outcast, rebellious kid in a small town, is it sufficient for a man desperately searching for something to believe in or a man searching for a place to belong? If not, why? That isn’t a rhetorical question for me. It’s one which comes from the very essence of my soul, and there are tears associated with it. That Methodist friend I mentioned had a nervous breakdown which took her out of high school because of the abuse she suffered; I survived. Why should I have made it not her? If Christ’s atonement is only sufficient for Christians, why should I be saved and given an eternity in paradise while my friend suffers an eternity in hell? He’s been through enough lately.

God has chosen, for reasons which are unfathomable to me, but which I assume He knows, to be kind to me, to strengthen me and sustain me and even, at a point when all seemed completely and utterly lost, to restore me by means of what I see as a miracle. I don’t deserve the gifts I’ve been given in this world, let alone the next. How can I deny the greatest gift we have been given, that of salvation and acceptance, including the forgiveness of our sins, to my brothers and sisters? How can I deny it to my own father, for that matter, a curmudgeonly agnostic who was never baptized, despite having sung in church choirs?

This had gotten a lot more long-winded than I intended, but I’ll pose one more question, one which troubles me. What does God do when someone is driven away from Christianity by the actions of Christians? Is it right that God should welcome the Christian while condemning the one who was driven away? My gut reaction, shaped by years of being the one who was driven away is no, He wouldn’t condemn the latter while welcoming the former. He would not be that unjust. He cannot be, or, if He is, then I cannot worship Him and I accept my condemnation. Others opinions, of course, vary.

Respectfully,
CJ

134

Actually, I didn’t really mean to start a debate. I didn’t claim Christianity was the “one, true religion,” merely the criteria Christ Himself espoused to become a Christian. The claim is that Christ didn’t want to set up a “hurdle” to getting to God - but He states elsewhere exactly that, particularly in John 3:36 -
“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (KJV)” Parallel translations are here:
http://bible.cc/john/3-36.htm
It should be noted that this was at the beginning of Christ’s ministry - he hadn’t even performed his miracles in Galilee yet, so it was obviously important, if he was going to make such a far-reaching statement so early.
I’m not here to pronounce hate or intolerance, merely that Christ established a very clear demarcation, out of necessity I believe, between those who were genuine believers and those who weren’t. I don’t see it as exclusionary, but rather inclusive - you only have to meet ONE criteria, not a whole pile of do’s and don’ts.

135

I wouldn’t want to try to change your beliefs or Vanilla’s because it isn’t my place to sit in judgment on those beliefs anymore than either of you can set yourselves up to be an interpreter for me.

But my beliefs are, in part, also based in Scripture. According to Mark 9:40, Jesus said that if a man was not against him, he was with him. Another time (Matthew 7:21), Jesus said that proclaiming him as Lord just doesn’t cut it; it’s about doing the will of the Father.

But the verse that stays with me the most on the subject and which seems most compatible with a loving God are these from John 10:16: “Many sheep have I that are not of this fold.” For someone unacquainted with the Bible, that wouldn’t mean much. But to someone familiar with Old Testament prophesy and the image of Jesus in Christian tradition as the Good Shepherd, it says a lot.

Even though you cannot interpret for me, that doesn’t mean that I can’t learn from you and other Christians.

If fundamentalist Christians are serious about wanting to teach, why don’t more of them learn some of the basics of educating others?

136

That was very beautiful, Zoe. Thank you. There’s a St. John of the Cross poem in one of Madeleine L’Engle’s books which makes a similar point. Part of it reads,

*"It is your love that moves me, and in such a way
That even though there were no heaven,
I would love you,
And even though there were no hell,
I would fear you.

You do not have to give me anything
So that I love you,
For even if I didn’t hope for what I hope,
As I love you now, so would I love you."*

I apologise for the hijack.

137

That is truly beautiful, LL, and I for one thank you for it.

I’ve mentioned before in religion threads how someone quoted a piece of one of Billy Joel’s songs, and suggested hearing it as though it were God doing the speaking. It ties right into what you’re saying here. The quote:

138

Another Christian checking in here…I’m not very vocal about it, but I do know how I feel. And although I very rarely have any interaction with them on this board, Polycarp and Siege have shown me a level of knowledge, love, and peace that I hope to find someday.

I grew up Lutheran, dabbled in the Baptist Church and Catholicism, studied Wicca for awhile, and then returned to the Episcopal Church. Since leaving NYC and moving to Ohio, I haven’t yet found a church here that I love as much as my NYC church. One of the hard parts is that my husband is agnostic - he does believe in God, but isn’t particularly interested in going to church with me. It does bug me - I’ve always pictured going to church with my husband, and eventually kids - but I’m also not going to push something on him that he doesn’t want. He has said he’ll look into the Episcopal Church - he and I are similar in that we are extremely liberal in our views, and the Episcopal Church is liberal in many views. But I can’t force him to believe. Obviously, it’s not a deal-breaker for us, as I knew his beliefs from the beginning and we’re now married, but it is one of those things where I’d love it if he decided that he did want to attend church with me on a regular basis.

I do want to attend church again, though. I miss it. Reading this thread has made me realize how much.

Ava

139

Lissla, another friend whose judgment that I trust has said that I need to read Madeleine L’Engle. Judging from what you posted, she’s right. I wish I could write like that.

140

Roger, about twenty years ago I had to fight a smaller, but still professionally threatening battle against the Executive Principle of the school where I taught. I didn’t have to fight it by myself, but I prepared most of my case just out of the sheer rage I was feeling at the injustice and humiliation.

I won my grievance easily and the principle eventually was asked to resign. But by the time I had managed some semblance of forgiveness, the rage had just eaten me alive and I quit teaching. The anger continued for a long time even though it didn’t seem to be directed at anyone.

I may not know your feelings, but I do understand burn out.

(Aside to Roger)I dreamed about Victoria Station last night. I came up out of a subway at night and there it was. It was glorious! I walked along the street and asked people where a pleasant pub was, but the neighborhood got scuffier and an old man in a tweed overcoat and a bowler (what an awful stereotype) pinched my cheek and called me “dearie.” What I want to know is, is Victoria Station really still there and what is that awful man doing in a Christian dream?