Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Belief Statement - jar
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 208 of 300 (327509)
06-29-2006 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by jar
06-29-2006 12:23 PM


Re: Valid christian teaching?
jar writes:
I find the idea that Jesus crucifixion was some required payment for human sins just plain silly. Why would GOD become human just to get killed as some form of payment? It makes no sense. On the otherhand, the idea of GOD becoming human to teach us what His message really is, to show us by the most convincing possible demonstration that there is a life after death by dying and then coming back in persoan to talk and teach among his followers, that to me seems to make sense.
I found your whole post very interesting. I find in my own case that many Christians that I meet consider me a conservative Christian because of my views but Faith considers me a liberal Christian. I'm not suggesting that this makes my personal faith any more or less correct but it does indicate that it isn't particularly useful to try and label people as we are all a blend.
In regards to the part of your post that I quoted, our man CS Lewis wrote this in Mere Christianity.
CS Lewis writes:
Before I became a Christian I was under the impression that the first thing Christians had to believe was one particular theory as to what the point of this dying was. According to that theory God wanted to punish men for having deserted and joined the Great Rebel, but Christ volunteered to be punished instead, and so God let us off. Now, I admit that even this theory does not seem to me quite so immoral and so silly as it used to, but that is not the point I want to make.
What I came to see later on was that neither this nor any other is Christianity. The central Christian belief is that Christ's death has somehow put us right with God and given us a fresh start. Theories as to how it did this are another matter. A good many different theories have been held as to how it works; what all Christians are agreed on is that it does work.
I will tell you what I think it is like. All sensible people know that if you are tired a hungry a meal will do you good. But the modern theory of nourishment - all about vitamins and proteins - is a different thing. People ate their dinners and felt better long before the theory of vitamins was ever heard of: and if the theory of vitamins is some day abandoned they will go on eating their dinners just the same. Theories about Christ's death are not Christianity: they are explanations about how it works.
Christians would not all agree as to how important those theories are. My own church - the Church of England - does not lay down any one of them as being right. The Church of Rome goes a bit further. But I think they will all agree that the thing itself is infinitely more important than any explanations that theologians have produced. I think they would probably admit that no explanation will ever be quite adequate to the reality. But as I said in the preface of this book, I am only a layman, and at this point we are getting into deep water. I can only tell you, for what it is worth, how I personally, look at the matter.
As you yourself have mentioned many times, Christianity is an issue of faith, but in my view a faith that is consistent with what I see in the world. (I know that there just might be some on this forum that would disagree with that last statement. )

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by jar, posted 06-29-2006 12:23 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Faith, posted 06-29-2006 2:22 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 212 of 300 (327573)
06-29-2006 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by Faith
06-29-2006 2:22 PM


Re: Valid christian teaching?
Faith writes:
I read a lot, maybe even all, of C.S. Lewis when I was in the process of becoming a Christian, and seeing quotes from him now surprises me. Even then I could identify a tinge of liberalness in his writings but now that I'm a solid Calvinist Protestant he sounds extremely liberal. I can't see any other meaning to the sacrifice of the crucifixion than to pay for our sins. It's what the entire Bible is about really.
I guess I'm not really concerned whether someone is liberal or not, as I'm only concerned with truth. (I know that holds true for you as well.) The thing is though I don't think it is ever as simple as branding someone liberal or even Calvinist. I'm sure there are other Calvinist's who you would find areas of disagreement with.
Could you give me the Biblical references that you would use to make your point that the crucifixion is about payment for sins.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Faith, posted 06-29-2006 2:22 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Faith, posted 06-29-2006 7:44 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 213 of 300 (327579)
06-29-2006 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by lfen
06-29-2006 4:42 PM


Re: Valid christian teaching?
ifen writes:
He had the education and knew what was going on but chose the emotionality of faith over the honesty of what he knew.
That statement is more than a little bit presumptuous. Who are you to say that Lewis was dishonest in his faith. Just because you have come to a different conclusion than Lewis does not mean that his faith is a dishonest one. By coincidence I'm in the middle of Lewis' book called "Miracles". If you want to understand his rationale for his thinking on the subject you might want to give it a read.
ifen writes:
For me Christian apology always has this forced strained grasping at rationalizations. Spirituality requires beliefs in miracles that though acceptable to pre scientific peoples are simply not neccesary at this point and the gyrations to maintain this aspect of the faith is a bit painful for me to watch. I think Lewis had much better things to do with his intellect than try to come up with rationalizations for Christianity.
I've read this statement about miracles not being necessary before on this forum. I just find that very odd for a couple of reasons. Firstly there are no end of things that exist or occur that aren't necessary. You and I both exist but neither you or I are necessary. Secondly, if one believes that we are a product of an intelligence at all, even as deists, we then have to believe that miracles are possible as creation itself would take a miracle.
I also don't understand why living in the scientific era has anything to do with whether miracles happened, still happen or not. Science is the study of the physical, miracles would be a product of the metaphysical.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by lfen, posted 06-29-2006 4:42 PM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by lfen, posted 06-29-2006 8:54 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 216 of 300 (327614)
06-29-2006 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by Faith
06-29-2006 7:44 PM


Re: Scriptures on the crucifixion as sacrifice for sin
Thanks Faith
I actually asked for the quotes as I wanted to be made clear to me what your interpretation was based on.
I just want to repeat a small part of Lewis' quote from my previous post.
CS Lewis writes:
What I came to see later on was that neither this nor any other is Christianity. The central Christian belief is that Christ's death has somehow put us right with God and given us a fresh start. Theories as to how it did this are another matter. A good many different theories have been held as to how it works; what all Christians are agreed on is that it does work.
I agree that one could take your quotes and interpret them the way that you have. However, it also seems to me that they can be interpreted in a way that is consistent with Lewis.
Lewis says that Christ's death has put us right with God. The only thing that I can think of that needed to be put right was sin in our lives. That however is not the same thing as saying that Christ's death was payment for our sins.
To be honest it is an area of may faith that I have never been able to sort out in my mind. I have just come to the knowledge that it is part of the redemptive nature of Christ and that it is part of the mystery which won't be made clear in this life time. Christianity is a faith isn't it?

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Faith, posted 06-29-2006 7:44 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Faith, posted 06-29-2006 9:49 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 217 of 300 (327618)
06-29-2006 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by lfen
06-29-2006 8:54 PM


Re: Valid christian teaching?
ifen writes:
I am aware that I have this assumption probably from high school and college that it's understandable that some one who doesn't know better for example the fundamentalist who show up here knowing nothing about science except what they read on AIG and little of history to believe literally in the Bible, but I do just have this impatience with someone like Lewis who is well educated and even knew better but then backed off from his knowing. I expected more of him. That is presumptious on my part. I'll neither defend myself nor apologize for it though. It's just something I do.
Nice post ifen. It's nice to read someone who basically seems to have an open mind and a sense of humility.
Having read a lot of Lewis I know that he was very interested in the details of science. Although I obviously am not in the same league as Lewis in either issues of faith or science I find no real areas of disagreement between my faith and science. As a matter of fact, the more I read about science the more it affirms my faith. I am frankly blown away but what I see is the incredible invention that this universe is that allows my consciousness to perceive it the way it does.
I might point out as well that there are many professional scientists that are Christian and they don't seem to have a problem reconciling their faith to science either. (I would doubt that many of them are literalists either.)
ifen writes:
The point I was making is the science disproves or discredits or demonstrates the scientific impossibility of miracles such as a 6000 year old universe, the Flood, or virgin birth.
Lewis was not a YEC. Frankly I don't know what he thought of the flood, but I think he would feel as I do that the lesson of faith in the story is what is important and not the idea of whether it is literally true or not. As far as a virgin birth is concerned it doesn't seem to me that it would be all that difficult for the creator of the universe to create life in a virgin.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by lfen, posted 06-29-2006 8:54 PM lfen has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 219 of 300 (327655)
06-30-2006 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by Faith
06-29-2006 9:49 PM


Re: Scriptures on the crucifixion as sacrifice for sin
The Blood of Christ is compared to the blood of the lamb from the OT. The blood of the lamb was a mark at passover that protected the Jews.
The Blood of Christ and His death on the cross is what made it possible for us to be passed over and forgiven of our sins.
Faith writes:
Funny I hadn't realized how mealymouthed Lewis can be. Must have something to do with the liberal (it means Bible-compromising basically) trends in the Anglican/Episcopal church.
Well. Lewis was only an English tutor at Oxford. Actually he is anything but mealymouthed. It just happens that he doesn't agree with some of your positions.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Faith, posted 06-29-2006 9:49 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Faith, posted 06-30-2006 1:19 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 222 of 300 (327664)
06-30-2006 1:41 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by Faith
06-30-2006 1:19 AM


Re: Scriptures on the crucifixion as sacrifice for sin
CS Lewis writes:
The central Christian belief is that Christ's death has somehow put us right with God and given us a fresh start. Theories as to how it did this are another matter. What all Christians are agreed on is that it does work.
Actually I don't think we're that far apart so maybe we can agree with the quoted statement and agree to disagree on the theory although I'll be the first to admit that you're view is more clearly defined.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by Faith, posted 06-30-2006 1:19 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by Faith, posted 06-30-2006 2:11 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 247 of 300 (327813)
06-30-2006 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by Faith
06-30-2006 2:19 PM


Re: Scriptures on the crucifixion as sacrifice for sin
faith writes:
Death is the wages of sin, says scripture.
My reading of this is that it is talking of death in the life to come, which means hell, which means separation from God.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Faith, posted 06-30-2006 2:19 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Brian, posted 06-30-2006 3:57 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 256 of 300 (327894)
06-30-2006 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by Brian
06-30-2006 3:57 PM


Re: Scriptures on the crucifixion as sacrifice for sin
Brian writes:
Do you believe that we are born sin free?
Good question. I think that we are born with a sin nature. Infants by nature seem to be focused on nothing but their own needs. This lasts for some time before they start to learn concepts such as fairness and sharing etc.
When we talk about conscience, I believe that is God working in us and it is listening and responding positively to that still small voice that makes us right with God. It isn't the doing of good works that makes us right with God, as people can perform good works for any variety of reasons that are not of God.It is about loving God, and our neighbour and only God truly knows our heart.
Becoming a Christian gives us a new start with God and a more acute sense of that still small voice. IMHO

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Brian, posted 06-30-2006 3:57 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Brian, posted 07-01-2006 8:51 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 265 of 300 (327958)
07-01-2006 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 257 by Brian
07-01-2006 8:51 AM


Loving God
Brian writes:
So, if we are all born into a sinful condition, what is the cure?
By loving God and loving our neighbour. Loving our neighbour is straight forward.
Loving God is more open to discussion. (I'm repeating myself from earlier posts but we seem to keep covering the same ground.) Loving God in my view means loving goodness and hating evil, loving love and hating hate, loving joy and hating sorrow. We are given the free will to choose the things that God would have us choose or to reject them.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Brian, posted 07-01-2006 8:51 AM Brian has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 285 of 300 (328319)
07-02-2006 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by jar
07-02-2006 9:55 AM


Re: Jar On Salvation
jar writes:
GOD will judge us on what we do in life.
I still kinda wondering if we agree or not, or if I'm just nit-picking.
If I take the above quote literally then it means that if I spend 10 hours a week doing volunteer work for others and donate 15% of my income to charity I'm more likely to wind up with salvation than someone who spends 5 hours a week and donates 8%. What is the cut-off? (3.7 hours and 6.27% maybe)
I think that we can also safely assume that some people perform good works because they like being told what wonderful people they are, while others serve anonymously. Are their deeds judged equally? I would just contend that we are judged on the condition of our heart, and not our deeds or our understanding of doctrine.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by jar, posted 07-02-2006 9:55 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by jar, posted 07-02-2006 5:30 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 288 by Brian, posted 07-02-2006 5:31 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 290 of 300 (328333)
07-02-2006 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by Brian
07-02-2006 5:31 PM


Re: Jar On Salvation
As we are getting near the end I'll respond to both jar and Brian in one post.
jar writes:
One other point is that often the discussion seems to turn to charity or the poor. Sure, charity, the sick and poor, those less fortunate than ourselves are a fact of life. But I don't think that GOD says "Take care of the poor!" Instead, we are commanded to try to love others as we love ourselves. Soup kitchens are fine, but helping the person behind you in line at the check out counter is too, or kneeling down when you talk to kids so you are at their level, or saying high to someone or a simple smile.
I agree completely. Nicely said.
Brian writes:
When I was a Christian I felt that it was because I loved Jesus that good deeds flowed automatically, doing good was not something I had to think about, it was just the way things were.
In my own experience I wouldn't say that good deeds flowed automatically, but I will say that after I came to the knowledge that I'd accepted Christ as Lord, I viewed the things that I said and did in a different way. One of the things that I noticed is that I was much more conscious of how I talked to, and about, other people. I had a higher sense of awareness of how what I said and did affected others.
Brian writes:
What I am wondering is if Jar has got things the wrong way round. Instead of loving others first and this some way shows that you love God, doesn't it make more sense that by loving God with all your heart, soul and mind, (which Jesus says is the most important commandment)would result in the joy of knowing God which would automatically fill you with love for your fellow humans and thus you would do what you could for them?
OK, but I think the main point that jar is making is that you can love God without knowing Him by name.
As I see it, God has planted in all of us the ability to choose between good and evil and when we choose goodness we are in fact choosing Him. My view is that it is about loving the goodness and hating the evil. And as far as Christianity is concerned I go back to what I said before, and that is that when we accept Christ as Lord we have a more acute awareness of good and evil to guide us in the way we ought to go. This does not make us better than our Atheistic next door neighbour, but if we are sincere then we should be better than we were previously.
Edited by GDR, : Restructured paragraphs as it looked like I was attributing to jar things that were my own thoughts.
Edited by GDR, : I accidently put a quote from Brian in with jar's quote. Sorry
Edited by GDR, : No reason given.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Brian, posted 07-02-2006 5:31 PM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by jar, posted 07-02-2006 6:37 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 292 of 300 (328337)
07-02-2006 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by jar
07-02-2006 6:37 PM


Re: Jar On Salvation
Sorry jar. It was poorly written so I changed the way the paragraphs were structured. It looked I was attributing my thoughts to you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by jar, posted 07-02-2006 6:37 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by jar, posted 07-02-2006 6:56 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 294 of 300 (328340)
07-02-2006 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by jar
07-02-2006 6:56 PM


Re: Jar On Salvation
I must have screwed it up when I copied it back out of word. I think it's ok now. Sorry

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by jar, posted 07-02-2006 6:56 PM jar has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 300 of 300 (328529)
07-03-2006 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by iano
07-03-2006 10:49 AM


Re: Jar On Salvation
iano writes:
how does one conclude that the "sheep and the goats" (invoked as some kind of proof text) is a causal one (ie: a sheep is declared a sheep because of their good works) and not a consequential one (they did good works because they are sheep)?
It seems to me that when one reads the passage that the salvation is a direct result.
Matthew25 writes:
34"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. 35For I was hungry etc.
We can also observe that through life experience that not all Christians are more generous or loving than all non Christians.
We are also told directly that in the same book that calling on the name of Christ does not automatically make one a sheep.
Matthew 7 writes:
21"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. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
Here Christ clearly states that it is those who do the will of the father who enter the kingdom of heaven and that not everyone who acknowledges Christ as Lord is in the Father's will.
I contend that the two passages together indicate strongly that the sheep are sheep because of their good works and that it isn't strictly consequential.
Paul seems to agree when he writes this:
Romans writes:
12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
However we can read from the book of John that we are not strictly on our own in our ability to respond to Christ and his message of love.
John 13 writes:
25"All this I have spoken while still with you. 26But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. 27Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.
The Holy Spirit reminds us but we still can reject that which we are reminded of.
Paul in Romans tells us that we can learn of God from his creation as well as from scripture. One cannot learn Christianity from learning about God from his creation.
Romans 1 writes:
20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities”his eternal power and divine nature”have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
All in all I contend that the scriptural evidence that indicates that it is not what we believe that brings salvation but it is how we reflect God's love to us on the world around us.
Edited by GDR, : No reason given.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by iano, posted 07-03-2006 10:49 AM iano has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024