[Orayn]

What Jesus said and taught is the bottom line. He came to call sinners (all humans) to repentance, for us to turn to God through repentance, and by belief in his death and resurrection on the cross we will receive eternal life.

The bit in Luke where Christ specifies that Game Analyst's interpretation of His words is the only valid one is my favorite verse. It moves me to tears every time I read it.

[Dude Abides]

Those were excerpts from my essay. Like I said, I wasn't saying not to help those in need.

You were saying who cares about them. Same difference.

[LegatoB]

I'm still not seeing how being a "proper" Christian prevents one from pursuing social justice on Earth. I'm kind of slow, though, and my religious education is poor, so perhaps someone can explain it to me in simple words with references?

[Kinitari]

As an atheist myself I'm not sure how can you say something like that. You can accept his choice? That's fine. But to claim he *should* join another church? You wish to see him joining another church? Really? To me, how "progressive" or good willed towards LGBT, poors, etc. a congregation is is almost irrelevant. What keeps bothering me about these other churchs is that no matter what kind of behavior they promote, they still accept made up stories as explanations on how the natural world works and embrace self-deluded wishful thinking about life after death. No self-proclaimed atheist should see this as a good thing. I know that from a religious perspective it must sound annoying, if not even offensive, but the brutal truth is that from a non-believer perspective to say something like "I wish you will join another church" as a good-willed augury sounds pretty much like "I wish you will keep living under some giant hallucination, incapable of discerning truth from fantasies". Why would you ever say that to someone you don't hate fiercely?

I'm sorry, are you the arbiter of atheism? Do we have to go through you first before we make any important decisions, ethical or otherwise? How about this, you right that shit down for everyone - so none of us get confused and start thinking that Atheism is simply a lack of belief. I almost for a while thought that there wasn't any criteria other than that - thanks for correcting me bro.

[Orayn]

I'm still not seeing how being a "proper" Christian prevents one from pursuing social justice on Earth. I'm kind of slow, though, and my religious education is poor, so perhaps someone can explain it to me in simple words with references?

If you care TOO much about social justice, it means you're putting things that are "of this world" ahead of more important stuff like heaping praise on Jesus. Or something like that.

[RELAYER]

this thread is a fascinating study in emotional tribalism

[Liquid Helium]

I'm still not seeing how being a "proper" Christian prevents one from pursuing social justice on Earth. I'm kind of slow, though, and my religious education is poor, so perhaps someone can explain it to me in simple words with references?

If you are a "proper Christian" then you believe the bible is the word of god, and in it it says disgusting things like "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination." and "Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." If you are perusing social justice for women or LGBTs then you are going against gods word, and I don't think you can be called a "proper Christian" if you do that.

[Pollux]

If you care TOO much about social justice, it means you're putting things that are "of this world" ahead of more important stuff like heaping praise on Jesus. Or something like that.

And therein lies the problem with the "once saved always saved" and "through faith alone" crowd...That when the only thing that matters is faith and works are viewed as worthless then you can justify doing or not doing anything. It's just a different form of moral relativism that can be twisted to fit whatever point of view the person arguing wants it fit in to.

It's ironic really, since one of the biggest complaints of of those folks is the idea of moral relativism when they're just as morally relativistic as the next person. They just try to hide behind a twisted version of scripture.

[TucoBenedictoPacifico]

I'm sorry, are you the arbiter of atheism? Do we have to go through you first before we make any important decisions, ethical or otherwise?

Did I ever claim to be an arbiter? No. So quit the over-dramatic stance.

It's common sense, if you give any weight to what your philosophical view of the world implies: if don't believe, if you don't think that religion holds any truth, how can you wish, in good will, to see someone joining one church rather than another? It's like to wish someone a happy prolonged stay in a mental hospital.
It's as simple as that.

[Kinitari]

Did I ever claim to be an arbiter? No. So quit the over-dramatic stance. It's common sense, if you give any weight to what your philosophical view of the world implies: if don't believe, if you don't think that religion holds any truth, how can you wish, in good will, to see someone joining one church rather than another? It's as simple as that.

You obviously haven't given this any thought then. I don't personally care what other people believe, as long as their is no direct harm coming to me because of it. If someone wants to talk about belief or non-belief, sure I'll 'proselytize' - but I simply don't see it as a numbers game, nor do I want the job of actively trying to move people away from whatever faith they hold.

You, on the other hand, deride other atheists for not acting or believing in the same values you hold. Remember, you can believe in Ghosts and be Atheist. You can be an idiot and be an Atheist, you can think the world is flat and be an Atheist - the only chain that binds us is that we don't believe in God(s).

As soon as you start telling Atheists how they should or shouldn't act however - NOW I start caring.

[RELAYER]

Did I ever claim to be an arbiter? No. So quit the over-dramatic stance. It's common sense, if you give any weight to what your philosophical view of the world implies: if don't believe, if you don't think that religion holds any truth, how can you wish, in good will, to see someone joining one church rather than another? It's as simple as that.

Theoretically he could find a church that gives him a sense of community and facilitates his desire to help society. Through the gatherings held in this church, he and others could formulate ways to help others and have a tangible impact in the world. He could replace the things he has lost with something even better, and people that make him happy.
I'm sure every activity you engage in is distilled, unadulterated, empirically-verified peer-reviewed Truth.

[operon]

And therein lies the problem with the "once saved always saved" and "through faith alone" crowd...That when the only thing that matters is faith and works are viewed as worthless then you can justify doing or not doing anything. It's just a different form of moral relativism that can be twisted to fit whatever point of view the person arguing wants it fit in to. It's ironic really, since one of the biggest complaints of of those folks is the idea of moral relativism when they're just as morally relativistic as the next person. They just try to hide behind a twisted version of scripture.

totally agree

[The_Darkest_Red]

And therein lies the problem with the "once saved always saved" and "through faith alone" crowd...That when the only thing that matters is faith and works are viewed as worthless then you can justify doing or not doing anything. It's just a different form of moral relativism that can be twisted to fit whatever point of view the person arguing wants it fit in to. It's ironic really, since one of the biggest complaints of of those folks is the idea of moral relativism when they're just as morally relativistic as the next person. They just try to hide behind a twisted version of scripture.

Works aren't viewed as worthless, though. Just because they don't grant you salvation doesn't mean you shouldn't care about doing what pleases God. This is a very frequent topic of discussion in the book of Romans. Romans 6, for example.

[Liquid Helium]

You obviously haven't given this any thought then. I don't personally care what other people believe, as long as their is no direct harm coming to me because of it. If someone wants to talk about belief or non-belief, sure I'll 'proselytize' - but I simply don't see it as a numbers game, nor do I want the job of actively trying to move people away from whatever faith they hold. You, on the other hand, deride other atheists for not acting or believing in the same values you hold. Remember, you can believe in Ghosts and be Atheist. You can be an idiot and be an Atheist, you can think the world is flat and be an Atheist - the only chain that binds us is that we don't believe in God(s). As soon as you start telling Atheists how they should or shouldn't act however - NOW I start caring.

He hasn't not given it any thought, he just cares about other people more than you. he understand/thinks something negatively affects peoples lives and so he doesn't want people to do it, and he doesn't understand how other people who also thought that that thing negatively affects peoples lives would want people to do that thing. He isn't telling other atheists what to do he just thinks they are immoral or wrong to do that thing, and I agree with him. Maybe his mistake is saying atheists and not anti-theists but I think in this case it's a meaningless distinction.

edit:
I don't mean to speak for him, but that's how I read his posts anyway.
"cares about other people more than you" sounds harsher than what I mean to say, I don't mean any offence.

[ChiTownBuffalo]

This is a quote from Tony Campolo, who is a pastor in the heretic "Emergent Church." There really isn't an "emergent church," its just a phrase that some people label a growing movement in Christianity, which pastors like Campolo and Jim Wallis are seen as leaders of.

“One of the meanest arguments against public schools comes from alarmists who contend that public school students can be forced to study under homosexuals and might even be subjected to homosexual seduction. This contention makes me furious – not because I believe there are no homosexuals in the public school system, but because of the implication that homosexuals are some kind of special threat to children.”

This quote has been used by many Christians as a condemnation of Pastor Campolo and that whole idea that maybe the most pressing thing shouldn't be homosexuality and abortion when it comes to our faith.

This is a paraphrase, but:

Some people believe the alternative to bad religion is secularism, but that's wrong. (For me, not for everyone.) The answer to bad religion is better religion--prophetic rather than partisan, broad and deep instead of narrow, and based on values as opposed to ideology.

[Lindbergh]

I don't blame you Mr. Buffalo, modern American-style Christianity is too weird even outright noxious at times.

But I wonder if you attribute any authority to the Bible. I'm very curious as to why people give such an arbitrary collection of books much authority.

[TucoBenedictoPacifico]

He hasn't not given it any thought, he just cares about other people more than you. he understand/thinks something negatively affects peoples lives and so he doesn't want people to do it, and he doesn't understand how other people who also thought that that thing negatively affects peoples lives would want people to do that thing. He isn't telling other atheists what to do he just thinks they are immoral or wrong to do that thing, and I agree with him. Maybe his mistake is saying atheists and not anti-theists but I think in this case it's a meaningless distinction. edit: I don't mean to speak for him, but that's how I read his posts anyway. "cares about other people more than you" sounds harsher than what I mean to say, I don't mean any offence.

Exactly what I meant, thank you.

[Kinitari]

He hasn't not given it any thought, he just cares about other people more than you. he understand/thinks something negatively affects peoples lives and so he doesn't want people to do it, and he doesn't understand how other people who also thought that that thing negatively affects peoples lives would want people to do that thing. He isn't telling other atheists what to do he just thinks they are immoral or wrong to do that thing, and I agree with him. Maybe his mistake is saying atheists and not anti-theists but I think in this case it's a meaningless distinction. I don't mean to speak for him, but that's how I read his posts anyway.

Haha, I appreciate you replying, but man - that bold is a gem. You think I don't care about people who are religious? There are people out there I care about that think a WHOLE lot of dumb things - they believe in homeopathy, ghosts, giant conspiracies - the works. I don't go around telling them "Look, I care about you, so everything you believe in is wrong - start thinking like me" - in any way. If someone has doubts, they know my position so if they want to come and talk to me, I'm there. But wanting to 'save' everyone because you love them? That's Jesus-people talk, honestly.

If he wants to go about telling people the error of their ways, cool! Let him have his day, I just don't want to be involved - and I find it ridiculous that he judge other Atheists (including myself) for not falling in line.

[Liquid Helium]

This is a quote from Tony Campolo, who is a pastor in the heretic "Emergent Church." There really isn't an "emergent church," its just a phrase that some people label a growing movement in Christianity, which pastors like Campolo and Jim Wallis are seen as leaders of. “One of the meanest arguments against public schools comes from alarmists who contend that public school students can be forced to study under homosexuals and might even be subjected to homosexual seduction. This contention makes me furious – not because I believe there are no homosexuals in the public school system, but because of the implication that homosexuals are some kind of special threat to children.” This quote has been used by many Christians as a condemnation of Pastor Campolo and that whole idea that maybe the most pressing thing shouldn't be homosexuality and abortion when it comes to our faith. This is a paraphrase, but: Some people believe the alternative to bad religion is secularism, but that's wrong. (For me, not for everyone.) The answer to bad religion is better religion--prophetic rather than partisan, broad and deep instead of narrow, and based on values as opposed to ideology.

But at what point are you still a Christian if you are just ripping out all the negative parts of it? Do you just think that the parts in the bible were it says homosexuality is an abomination and stone the gays and all that are not gods word? Or do you think they are but god is just a prick. I fear I come across more argumentative than I mean to, it's an honest question and I would genuinely like to know what you think.
Also I don't think that most people believe the alternative to bad religion is secularism for the reasons you think, the bible being evil and saying evil things isn't the reason most/I am an atheist, the reason I am an atheist is because there is no god. There is no reason that god can't exist and be a prick at the same time.

[Liquid Helium]

Haha, I appreciate you replying, but man - that bold is a gem. You think I don't care about people who are religious? There are people out there I care about that think a WHOLE lot of dumb things - they believe in homeopathy, ghosts, giant conspiracies - the works. I don't go around telling them "Look, I care about you, so everything you believe in is wrong - start thinking like me" - in any way. If someone has doubts, they know my position so if they want to come and talk to me, I'm there. But wanting to 'save' everyone because you love them? That's Jesus-people talk, honestly. If he wants to go about telling people the error of their ways, cool! Let him have his day, I just don't want to be involved - and I find it ridiculous that he judge other Atheists (including myself) for not falling in line.

Yeah, that sentence was harsher than what I meant, but I am not eloquent enough to word it in the way I mean, sorry. I edited it before you posted in an attempt to not cause you offence, I don't mean to. I don't think his post was talking about proselytizing, just finding that other atheists would say that he should find another church wrong, because it's hypocritical to think something is bad and then tell someone to do that bad thing.

edit: sorry for the double post, I though someone else would have posted by now :P

[Pollux]

Works aren't viewed as worthless, though. Just because they don't grant you salvation doesn't mean you shouldn't care about doing what pleases God. This is a very frequent topic of discussion in the book of Romans. Romans 6, for example.

You and I are both intelligent enough to know that we could quote Scripture back and forth in defense of our respective positions all day long. Let's not derail the thread lol.

But I'll leave you with a couple quotes...

Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

"For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done."

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?' The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.' Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and to the Gentiles also, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.

"Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says."

"All the dead were judged according to their deeds."

"Behold, I am coming soon. I bring with me the recompense I will give to each according to his deeds."

[Kinitari]

Yeah, that sentence was harsher than what I meant, but I am not eloquent enough to word it in the way I mean, sorry. I edited it before you posted in an attempt to not cause you offence, I don't mean to. I don't think his post was talking about proselytizing, just finding that other atheists would say that he should find another church wrong, because it's hypocritical to think something is bad and then tell someone to do that bad thing. edit: sorry for the double post, I though someone else would have posted by now :P

No worries - here is the major difference though. I don't think there is anything inherently -wrong- with religion. In it's most docile form, it doesn't effect me two winks. There are churches out there who don't doubt Evolution, who don't discriminate against anyone, and who do tons of community service. What beef would I have with these churches? Am I really so steadfast in my desire for everyone to be Atheist that I don't even consider that maybe such a church would be a good fit for someone who wants to be religious, but doesn't want to hate?

More than anything, I think it's important for Chi to be happy, and he wants to be a Christian - and if he wants to be a part of a community, maybe he can find a church like that. But if he wants to be a solo-worshipper, that's fine too - as long as he's happy in this path and he isn't hurting anyone.

[CornBurrito]

No. Mankind cannot earn heaven by doing good works

To who exactly? Who do we have to prove to that we know god by doing observable good deeds?

[The_Darkest_Red]

You and I are both intelligent enough to know that we could quote Scripture back and forth in defense of our respective positions all day long. Let's not derail the thread lol.

I must admit, I'm a little confused. You said we probably shouldn't derail the thread by quoting Scripture back and forth and then quoted a bunch of Scripture verses. :p

Anyway, I believe that the verses you've quoted are important and meaningful but I do not believe their interpretation should be made completely out of context from the rest of The Bible (particularly the New Testament). For example, I believe that in Matthew 7:21 "the will of my Father" is complete belief and trust in Christ Jesus to save us from our sins. I believe that is the will of the Father.

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

[Cyan]

...End of Days battle between atheists and Christians.

let's do this.

[ChiTownBuffalo]

But at what point are you still a Christian if you are just ripping out all the negative parts of it? Do you just think that the parts in the bible were it says homosexuality is an abomination and stone the gays and all that are not gods word? Or do you think they are but god is just a prick. I fear I come across more argumentative than I mean to, it's an honest question and I would genuinely like to know what you think. Also I don't think that most people believe the alternative to bad religion is secularism for the reasons you think, the bible being evil and saying evil things isn't the reason most/I am an atheist, the reason I am an atheist is because there is no god. There is no reason that god can't exist and be a prick at the same time.

This is more or less how I feel.

I think that people have focused too much on what Paul wrote and not what Jesus said in the Gospels.

[JGS]

I don't blame you Mr. Buffalo, modern American-style Christianity is too weird even outright noxious at times. But I wonder if you attribute any authority to the Bible. I'm very curious as to why people give such an arbitrary collection of books much authority.

As has been mentioned numerous times, there is no one size fits all American religion. The debate going on now verifies this.

There are ministries that apparently put little value in Scripture and instead focus on societal issues. Ironically this fits into the notion of Christianity being a big societal value. While true its not the only thing.

[Game Analyst]

So you would be OK with, for the sake of an example, paying higher taxes to help fund a completely federally funded an run healthcare program so EVERYONE can get the best care they possibly can especially those who would have no way of paying for legitimate medical care otherwise? After all that would be the most efficient way to help as large of a group of people in need possible...

I am good with offering medical care to all who need it only if people are not forced to pay for things that violate their religious beliefs.

The bit in Luke where Christ specifies that Game Analyst's interpretation of His words is the only valid one is my favorite verse. It moves me to tears every time I read it.

Jesus ministry and mission was the gospel message to sinners; to repent and escape the wrath to come. That was his mission statement taught throughout all of the Gospels.

You were saying who cares about them. Same difference.

The churches main responsibility is to equip believers to be used by God. This is the purpose of the church, to teach the saints. Then the mission to the sinner to evangelize and mature believers (Eph. 4:8-16, Matt. 28:18-20).

And therein lies the problem with the "once saved always saved" and "through faith alone" crowd...That when the only thing that matters is faith and works are viewed as worthless then you can justify doing or not doing anything.

Love should be the motivating factor for serving God. That is why the Gospel is called "The Gospel of Grace."

But I'll leave you with a couple quotes...

Those quotes fail to mention the verses that say believers are judged, not for earning salvation, but for the works they have done for Jesus (at the bema seat of Christ). These works are rewarded with crowns and other things that will be given in heaven.

The other judgment is for nonbelievers. This is where they will be judged for rejecting Jesus.

So, there are two judgements, one for believers and one for nonbelievers.

To who exactly? Who do we have to prove to that we know god by doing observable good deeds?

To the christian or non-christian?

[Sotha Sil]

Did I ever claim to be an arbiter? No. So quit the over-dramatic stance. It's common sense, if you give any weight to what your philosophical view of the world implies: if don't believe, if you don't think that religion holds any truth, how can you wish, in good will, to see someone joining one church rather than another? It's like to wish someone a happy prolonged stay in a mental hospital. It's as simple as that.

What if it makes them happy? As an atheist, I'm perfectly fine with level-headed, accepting religious persons staying religious. They have faith? Good for them. If it helps them deal with the harsh reality of life, I'm happy for them. If you don't try to interfere with other people's agency, you're OK in my book.

[The Technomancer]

What if it makes them happy? As an atheist, I'm perfectly fine with level-headed, accepting religious persons staying religious. They have faith? Good for them. If it helps them deal with the harsh reality of life, I'm happy for them. If you don't try to interfere with other people's agency, you're OK in my book.

Basically. I hold that if a person is comfortable and happy with their life because of their religious beliefs then that's actually beneficial to society: happy people are productive people (in more ways then one). Its only when intolerance comes into play that religious belief becomes a "problem"
I don't actually think that every person would be happier if they were atheist.

[Bitmap Frogs]

I am good with offering medical care to all who need it only if people are not forced to pay for things that violate peoples religious beliefs.

See, but that's a problem. Jehova Witness beliefs would imply this hypothetical UHC couldn't offer/pay for blood transfusions and other blood related treatments. Some other religious group would be against this or that.

On countries with UHC, there is no such discussion, you just pay your taxes and they pay for Healthcare. If you have a moral issue with any procedure you can chose not to have that procedure applied to you. But you can't tell someone else what he/she can do. In my country we have a strong traditionalist christian communnity that will soon get their wish granted: abortion-at-will will be gone, from now on it will be only paid by the UHC if it is medically necessary. But they would not dare to even try to remove the procedure from the UHC because they know the freedom that protects abortionists from them, also protects them from everybody else.

[Kentpaul]

Pro spoiler. God ain't real.

[CornBurrito]

To the christian or non-christian?

Why should I give a damn what other people think about me? It doesn't affect my standing with god.

[Cyan]

Pro spoiler. God ain't real.

Let's keep this thread spoiler-free, k?

[JGS]

Pro spoiler. God ain't real.

Pfft. Fake spoiler.

It's right up there with Soylent Green is actually a crisp, refreshing salad.

[bengraven]

The only issue I have debating with Christians (and as I've said, my wife is a devout Christian and so are many of my best friends) is the ones who can't take themselves out of lecture/preach mode while detailing their side of the issue. The reason this bothers me is because they go from sounding like themselves in casual conversation to suddenly sounding like they're basically quoting books of criticism. It makes me wonder how much they believe and how much they're just memorizing for talking points.

I like that my wife or a certain best friend of mine will talk to you about their deep faith without suddenly losing their personality and becoming a living wiki.

[CornBurrito]

It's right up there with Soylent Green is actually a crisp, refreshing salad.

IT ISNT????!!

[Cyan]

It's right up there with Soylent Green is actually a crisp, refreshing salad.

Soy beans and lentils. It's right there in the name.

[JGS]

IT ISNT????!!

Sorry, I fixed.

It could be...

[LosDaddie]

C-UNIT,

I went through the same thing back in 2003-2004. It was after I graduated from FSU, landed my first job (learning how private business actually operate), and was listening to a lot of AM radio news, that I started questioning what I been led to believe. The more I listened to the AM radio pundits, the more I realized how unchristian their rhetoric sounded to me, despite the pundits' feverish proclamations of being devout Christians. My co-workers at the time, all Christians (of course), spewed the same kind of hatred I heard on the radio, but with added racism, and were comfortable doing so in the workplace.

Around that time I was getting serious with my then-GF (who's now my wife), which meant I had to spend time with her Culture Warrior parents. Never once have I heard them talk about helping the poor/needy, or doing some charity work in their community, not even today (8yrs later). It's all been bashing democrats, outright hatred of gays, and whining about how Christianity is supposedly under attack in the USA.

This wasn't the Christ I learned about in the Bible. Not even close.

I was ready to quit the church and figure out my own path when fortunately one of my wife's co-workers told her about our current church, Northland. Decided to give it a shot, and was surprised how much I enjoyed it. The paster, Dr. Hunter, is great guy who takes a balanced approach to the issues, despite being an Evangelical preacher in the South. For example, Dr. Hunter had to step down as prez of the Christian Coalition of America because the org didn't want to expand its agenda to poverty and combating global warming. (the horror!) He even gave the closing prayer at Obama's DNC speech in '08, which many in the congregation were (and still are) furious about. So while I don't agree with everything my church/paster does, it's something I happily support. I know the church has a leader who isn't just another Limbaugh puppet.

Thus, C-UNIT, I recommend that you don't stop looking for a church. It may take a while to find the right one, but it'll be worth it.

[ChiTownBuffalo]

Jesus ministry and mission was the gospel message to sinners; to repent and escape the wrath to come. That was his mission statement taught throughout all of the Gospels.

Love should be the motivating factor for serving God. That is why the Gospel is called "The Gospel of Grace."

Grace is given to us freely, because God loves us as His children.

[Game Analyst]

Grace is given to us freely, because God loves us as His children.

We are only God's children when we repent and accept what Jesus did on our behalf. Where am I getting this from?

"But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God." John 1

Grace operates through the relationship we have with God. Where am I getting this from?

"For if you are trying to make yourselves right with God by keeping the law, you have been cut off from Christ! You have fallen away from God’s grace." Galatians 5:4

[ChiTownBuffalo]

We are only God's children when we repent and accept what Jesus did on our behalf. Where am I getting this from? "But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God." John 1 Grace operates through the relationship we have with God. Where am I getting this from? "For if you are trying to make yourselves right with God by keeping the law, you have been cut off from Christ! You have fallen away from God’s grace." Galatians 5:4

What about Ephesians 1? It say God gives His Grace freely to those he loves.

God only loves certain people?

[Dude Abides]

The churches main responsibility is to equip believers to be used by God. This is the purpose of the church, to teach the saints. Then the mission to the sinner to evangelize and mature believers (Eph. 4:8-16, Matt. 28:18-20).

Yes. Let 'em starve. Not your concern. That's what I said.

[Ela Hadrun]

I know that this is partially a result of my being steeped in Catholic catechism from birth, but I literally cannot understand how a person can study the Bible and come away believing that works are meaningless. It is so beyond me.

I mean, I think all the time about the Martha and Mary situation. I was raised by a Martha and ran around like an idiot trying to make sure the glass on the front door was shiny enough to make me a good person. I understand that that isn't the way to temporal or timeless happiness. But like. If your faith is working, your good works should be obvious. And Jesus explicitly denotes exactly what they look like. If you are sitting at the feet of Jesus in contemplation, then when you AREN'T doing that then you're doing all that feeding the sick, clothing the naked kind of stuff.

I volunteered with a Quaker-run prison program for a while and I was just so confused by how confused all the Christians in my life were by that. IT'S RIGHT THERE GUYS. I WAS IN PRISON AND YOU VISITED ME. GUESS WHAT MOM. I WENT TO PRISON AND VISITED JESUS AND WE TALKED ABOUT DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS AND MADE A TRUE HUMAN CONNECTION OF LOVE THROUGH GRACE. IT WAS PRETTY FUCKING GREAT.

Quakers are great but not my bag; the whole "up to three hours of group silent contemplation every Sunday" is like more Mary and less Martha than my constitution has EVER been able to handle lol

[Bamelin]

Interesting topic.

Game Analyst, we agree on alot of things, but that video portraying the emergent church is brutal. I've seen Tony preach multiple times since the early 80's and his message has always been Biblically centred around messages of Christ's love, salvation for humankind via the acceptance of Christ's sacrifice as well as expounding on Christ's core message around social justice.

The Emergent Church Movement is a very loose definition that describes many many different churches move towards social justice (which many feel is a core part of Christ's message). The Emergent Church (to me) also encompasses a new (better?) way of delivering The Message in a manner that is relevant to non believers today. Old school seminary doesn't work anymore, nor does the five point lecture message taught in Seminary. The Great Commissions overriding demand is to go out and preach the Gospel. It doesn't specify whether that's via hardcore 5 point sermon doctrinal preaching, teaching through emotions, song and the moving of the Spirit (Pentecostals and "Charismatic" Christian movements tend to be very good at that), or via conversational preaching popularized by the Emergent Church movement.

I put it this way to a pastor. Let's say the pastor puts up a map of the Ancient Middle East and tries to show how there were so many different cultures via a lecture style model, backed with scriptures. Most people (myself included) just can't relate to that ... It's just not relevant to most people. Wouldn't it be better to put up a local map of the city you live in (or country) to drive the point home about different cultures, then going back to the scriptures?

This is a key point the Church is wrestling with. Conversational Preaching versus old school 5 point sermon theology. Telling people what to do (5 point sermon) versus sharing with people your personal experiences and how the Word fits in with that.

Speaking to Game Analyst's concerns, the real issue many old school (and some new school too) churches have with Conversational style preaching, is that it tends to focus more on modern day issues, with light (if any) scriptural references to back up the core of whatever's being preached. Having been part of a Christian organization focused on Social Justice myself, the core tenants of the Word have were completely mangled or disregarded in favour of "whatever works" (which I obviously didn't agree with). Due the fractured nature of the Emergent Church Movement many very good churches have been unfairly lumped in with other churches who are going off point.

With that said, there are many churches that still have a solid theological base, preaching in the "Emergent/Conversational" style, while still backing up what's said with Scripture. To me that's really key ... It doesn't matter the manner in which the Message is delivered as long as it is grounded in the Scripture. There's alot of sour grapes in the right wing Evangelical community over the move to preach in different ways ... some of those concerns are justified (churches that have gone completely off point, basically interpreting and making things up as they go along to make things work), however, the super conservative factions have labelled EVERYONE that aren't "doctrinal enough" as heretics ... without realizing that the Spirit of Christ's message is just as important as the doctrinal fine points of the Word itself.

As it says in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"

Christ is the Word and the Word is Christ. Like I said, delivery method of getting the Word to the masses doesn't really matter as long as one stays true to the Word itself.

I hear you in some ways Game Analyst. "Wrathful God" doesn't play out well to modern audiences, so many churches (this is particularly true in the Emergent Movement) really only talk about "Loving God" ... With that said the overiding command of Christ is to get the Word out to the World ...

In the old days "Wrathful God/Lake of Fire/Sinner repent" got people down on their knees in fear of the Day of Judgement. Nowadays that style of sermon gets a big "you are an insane fundamentalist I'm never EVER coming back here again" Refer to OP. You see how that's not very conducive to mission outreach, or even holding on to your current congregation members? Loving God on the other hand sells and it sells well. Best of all there is nothing scripturally unsound about loving God:

1 John 4:8 Whoever Does not Love does not know God, because God is Love.

The Guy who wants me to be with him in Paradise sounds alot better than the Guy who wants to throw me into the Lake of Fire. They're both the same Guy, but guess what? If I was hearing about this Guy for the first time, the loving God is what would sell me on the Message.

Focus outreach on Loving God. Teach more about Wrathful God in closed Bible Studies AFTER the person has already given their life to Christ. It's all about message delivery. Too many Churches (especially the hardcore Evangelicals in the South) focus too much on screaming at people about how evil they are, how wrong they are, focus on niche issues, blowing them up into SINS while forgetting about all the other things that are sins. Christians need to be more like Christ, an image of Christ that does as Christ does. Sits with the tax collectors, cares for the sick and the needy, and makes themselves servants to others (including to other sinners).

[kinggroin]

I don't blame you Mr. Buffalo, modern American-style Christianity is too weird even outright noxious at times. But I wonder if you attribute any authority to the Bible. I'm very curious as to why people give such an arbitrary collection of books much authority.

Because from the perspective of that faith's followers, its NOT an arbitrary collection of books. Its a collection inspired by the greatest authority of all.


I mean, you couldn't figure this out yourself?

[Bitmap Frogs]

C-UNIT, I went through the same thing back in 2003-2004. It was after I graduated from FSU, landed my first job (learning how private business actually operate), and was listening to a lot of AM radio news, that I started questioning what I been led to believe. The more I listened to the AM radio pundits, the more I realized how unchristian their rhetoric sounded to me, despite the pundits' feverish proclamations of being devout Christians. My co-workers at the time, all Christians (of course), spewed the same kind of hatred I heard on the radio, but with added racism, and were comfortable doing so in the workplace. Around that time I was getting serious with my then-GF (who's now my wife), which meant I had to spend time with her Culture Warrior parents. Never once have I heard them talk about helping the poor/needy, or doing some charity work in their community, not even today (8yrs later). It's all been bashing democrats, outright hatred of gays, and whining about how Christianity is supposedly under attack in the USA. This wasn't the Christ I learned about in the Bible. Not even close. I was ready to quit the church and figure out my own path when fortunately one of my wife's co-workers told her about our current church, Northland. Decided to give it a shot, and was surprised how much I enjoyed it. The paster, Dr. Hunter, is great guy who takes a balanced approach to the issues, despite being an Evangelical preacher in the South. For example, Dr. Hunter had to step down as prez of the Christian Coalition of America because the org didn't want to expand its agenda to poverty and combating global warming. (the horror!) He even gave the closing prayer at Obama's DNC speech in '08, which many in the congregation were (and still are) furious about. So while I don't agree with everything my church/paster does, it's something I happily support. I know the church has a leader who isn't just another Limbaugh puppet. Thus, C-UNIT, I recommend that you don't stop looking for a church. It may take a while to find the right one, but it'll be worth it.

This is a very interesting tale, thanks for sharing. This, right here, is what is wrong with Christianity in America.

By the way, ChiTownBuffalo... I know you talked about not belonging to a specific church, but I have to say, consider finding one that doesn't repulse you. Just three people praying together is the house of the Lord, but it takes three people. Communnity matters in Christianity.

[Pollux]

I know that this is partially a result of my being steeped in Catholic catechism from birth, but I literally cannot understand how a person can study the Bible and come away believing that works are meaningless. It is so beyond me.

Agreed. I've tried to look at it from the other point of view, and it just doesn't make any sense.

[BocoDragon]

As an atheist myself I'm not sure how can you say something like that. You can accept his choice? That's fine. But to claim he *should* join another church? You wish to see him joining another church? Really? To me, how "progressive" or good willed towards LGBT, poors, etc. a congregation is is almost irrelevant. What keeps bothering me about these other churchs is that no matter what kind of behavior they promote, they still accept made up stories as explanations on how the natural world works and embrace self-deluded wishful thinking about life after death. No self-proclaimed atheist should see this as a good thing. I know that from a religious perspective it must sound annoying, if not even offensive, but the brutal truth is that from a non-believer perspective to say something like "I wish you will join another church" as a good-willed augury sounds pretty much like "I wish you will keep living under some giant hallucination, incapable of discerning truth from fantasies". Why would you ever say that to someone you don't hate fiercely?

Just because I don't think Christianity is true, doesn't mean that I see it as some sort of evil brainwashing monstrosity that must be opposed with no mercy.

The biggest problem I have with Christianity is the opposition to LGBT issues, and fundamentalist readings of the Bible that oppose scientific conclusions about the origins of the earth and life.

Well, I specifically suggested that ChiTown seek out these kinds of progressive churches, simply because that intolorance was his criticism with organized Christianity. He didn't say that he didn't believe in God or Jesus, so that suggestion seemed in line with what might work for him.

These progressive churches: they exist, and because they have eliminated my tangible concerns about their organization, my biggest complaint can only be "boo hoo... These people don't believe the same things that I do about metaphysical explanations of reality.. "

I'm a grown up. I don't actually expect everyone to believe the same things to be good people.

If you aren't actually a bad force (hating gays), then you've eliminated 99% of the "religion is evil" shtick. After that we're just talking about trivial matters of life that make it kind of ridiculous to shake a moralistic finger at. If someone accepts gay people, evolution, respects others beliefs... But believes in God and has Jesus as his personal savior? Who gives a shit?

It's good to argue with the truth of that theology (I do all the time), but once you've eliminated the actual, tangible harm that religion does, you're just having a philosophy debate about what is true... It can no longer be about some societal urgency.