Liberal Christianity

[Pete]

Liberal Christianity

There is much comment as to what is a Liberal Christian or indeed does such a thing exist. Some say we are not Christian.

I cannot speak for all Liberals, so I hope people will understand that I speak from a person viewpoint.

Much of the criticism that is laid against the liberal school of thought is that the concept is not biblical. The answer, I give to that is that is, being not biblical is the whole point, as liberals describe the bible as a collection of documents from differing recourses, written by man, choreographed to fit some of the Old Testament writings, and not the actual infallible words of God. Conservatives, on the hand, argue strongly that the Bible is the actual inerrant word of God. Liberals and Conservatives are therefore polarised at differing ends of the spectrum that is Christian theology.

Liberals do not argue that the bible is not inspiring but argue it is the fallible words of inspired men writing about their experience of Judeo-Christianity. Liberals may quote the bible but only where it has meaning to the topic being discussed but do not use it as the ultimate authority from which no argument can be placed. Liberals usually recognise that the gospels were written after Jesus' death and by people who never actually met Jesus. The nearest writer to the time of Jesus was Paul but I also recognise that Paul did not see eye to eye with those of the disciples in Jerusalem who actually met Jesus (Gal 1&2).

Conservatives argue that "2 Timothy 3:16" gives authority to the bible being true. This has led many atheists to recognise the circular argument they receive when talking to conservatives. "How do you know the bible is inerrant?" "Well! Because the bible says it is." "But how do you know this is so?" " Well! Because the bible says it is", and so the argument goes on and on with no further progress.

Liberals see Conservative Christianity has having become a faith about a book and not about the force of inspiration that inspired Jesus and the disciples. This is seen as a mistake, as liberals recognise that Gospels did not exist at the time of Jesus or his disciples, but were steadily written over a two hundred year period after the death of Jesus. The Gospels were not seen as holy scripts by the church until 400yrs later when they were canonised. The earliest gospel of Mark (which is seen as a building block for the synoptic gospels of Matthew and Luke) did not even declare that Jesus arose from the cross. The gospel ended when the tomb was found to be empty and thus leaving a mystery rather than a revelation of fact. The resurrection was added later.

Liberals usually believe in the word of God portrayed in the giving of love and in social initiatives. They recognised that God is said to have spoken through the hearts of mankind long before Matthew, Mark, Luke and John existed and even before Abraham and Isaac and see Christianity at a progressive revelation and not one just stuck in the words written 2000 years ago or more. Jesus is seen as being inspired by God and yet, even he did not follow the OT to the letter, which led to conflict with the religious leaders of the time. Jesus is felt to be not inspired blindly and only by writings of his time but by their practical applications and how they could be interpreted in relation to the love of God. For liberals, one of the main sayings that Jesus is supposed to have said is about loving God and loving your neighbour as yourself.

(Matthew 22:36-40 (Niv)

³⁶"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" ³⁷Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'^[a]38This is the first and greatest commandment. ³⁹And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'^[b]40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.")

The question this saying brings up for me, is the bible about loving ones neighbour as oneself? Does the bibles law and prophets truly support this notion? Sure, these verses can be found in the OT and the New Testament writings alike but the question I ask does the bible live up to this quote? (For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, "You shall love your Neighbor as yourself." (Galatians 5:14 RSV), If you really fulfil the royal law, according to the scripture,"You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well. (James 2:8 RSV), Deuteronomy 6:5 "And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might" and "Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbour as yourself. I am the LORD. (Niv).)

Let us take the sixth commandment "thou shalt not kill", which seems to me a perfectly good place to build a premise of loving ones neighbour and forgiving one another, but the bible does not leave it there It goes on to say:-

Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed. (Leviticus 20:9)

If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die. (Leviticus 20:10)

If a man sleeps with his father's wife... both him and his father's wife is to be put to death. (Leviticus 20:11)

If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death. (Leviticus 20:14)

If a man or woman has sex with an animal, both human and animal must be killed. (Leviticus 20:15-16).

Psychics, wizards, and so on are to be stoned to death. (Leviticus 20:27)

If a priest's daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake. (Leviticus 21:9)

Anyone who curses or blasphemes God, should be stoned to death by the community. (Leviticus 24:14-16)

The killing of homosexuals is condoned and encouraged in the wonderful laws of Leviticus. (Leviticus 20:13)

If you find out a city worships a different god, destroy the city and kill all of it's inhabitants... even the animals. (Deuteronomy 13:12-15)

Kill anyone with a different religion. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)

If anyone, even your own family suggests worshipping another God, kill them. (Deuteronomy 13:6-10) and so on.

It is not hard to find such verses in the Bible but the question for me still stands. Does the Bible preach a consistent message from God, that we should love ones neighbour as oneself? If the Bible is the word of God and God is said not to change, then surely, it is a relevant question of which I am personally led to the answer, No!

This does not mean I feel we should throw away all the teachings in the Bible but that we should read with a critical eye on what is important. For me, the question is always, is what I am reading consistent with Jesus' said commandment. For I believe it is in this commandment that Jesus has expressed the love God has for each of us. God is said to be spirit and I believe that Spirit is love. I am not going to pretend that my life always portrays a picture of love but I feel the ideal of Jesus' commandment worth the continued seeking, because it there I feel we see the real Jesus. I may not always have all the answers but I ready to admit that rather than just quoting a lot of biblical quotes and leaving people feel like a sinner because they have not understood. I call myself a Christian because I believe, I believe, in that same Spirit that inspired Jesus' to question and challenge things and to work for that love that he is said to and to work for the same commandment he is said to have saw as important. Liberals in my opinion are not Christians who have gone astray or backsliders but genuine deeply faithful seekers of truth. Fallible we maybe, human definitely, but with God's love we remain hopeful. We do not say that conservatives are not Christians, even though some say that of us. We just seek the truth in the Spirit of God rather than text alone. As Paul Tillich said, even if they found the actual bones of Jesus, it would not shake his faith in him.

I believe love matters to God more than adherence to any text and as the bible puts it:-

( "The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love." 1 John 4:8. "And we have come to know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him." 1 John 4:16).

Edited January 6, 2010 by Pete

[Carl Harry Carlson]

Wow, Pete, nice piece. Thank you.

Edited January 6, 2010 by Carl Harry Carlson

[Coolhand]

Liberal Christianity

Conservatives, on the hand, argue strongly that the Bible is the actual inerrant word of God. Liberals and Conservatives are therefore polarised at differing ends of the spectrum that is Christian theology.

Hey Pete, nice work.

Regardless of the labeling, if someone has applied what the Bible teaches to their life and they find it to be solid, helpful, and liberating; and because of this freedom they decide to say that the Bible has been proven in their life and experience to be inspired and inerrant, and they tell other people that based on their experiences the Bible is inspired and inerrant, is their opinion as valid to you as those who have not had the same experience?

[Brother Michael Sky]

ditto... , hope lots take the time to read... eloquently said....

[Pete]

Hey Pete, nice work.

Regardless of the labeling, if someone has applied what the Bible teaches to their life and they find it to be solid, helpful, and liberating; and because of this freedom they decide to say that the Bible has been proven in their life and experience to be inspired and inerrant, and they tell other people that based on their experiences the Bible is inspired and inerrant, is their opinion as valid to you as those who have not had the same experience?

Actually Cool, what led me to write was not the faith of conservatives but an article that declared Liberals were not Christian. It is at :- http://www.gotquestions.org/liberal-Christian-theology.html

I felt I should reply (because I am sure the site named would not let me do it directly) and talk about the depth of faith that is held by non- conservatives. We may not see things the same way but I am not here to say your faith is not valid. All I am saying is my faith is valid also.

[Coolhand]

Actually Cool, what led me to write was not the faith of conservatives but an article that declared Liberals were not Christian. It is at :- http://www.gotquestions.org/liberal-Christian-theology.html

I felt I should reply (because I am sure the site named would not let me do it directly) and talk about the depth of faith that is held by non- conservatives. We may not see things the same way but I am not here to say your faith is not valid. All I am saying is my faith is valid also.

I would say that "not saying something is not valid" is a little different than the "absolutely Pete" response I gave you when you asked if I considered you to be "as Christian" as an Assembly of God Christian.

To be specific what I am asking is do people who believe the Bible is inerrant get the same "absolutely brother" response from you regarding the validity of their beliefs that you have been given from me regarding your beliefs?

[Pete]

I would say that "not saying something is not valid" is a little different than the "absolutely Pete" response I gave you when you asked if I considered you to be "as Christian" as an Assembly of God Christian.

To be specific what I am asking is do people who believe the Bible is inerrant get the same "absolutely brother" response from you regarding the validity of their beliefs that you have been given from me regarding your beliefs?

I did wonder what the term "absolutely" actually meant when I am still having my friendship rejected because of what I believe. Do you remember how I have you on my list of friends but I am no longer listed on yours and have not been so for a long time.

However, I did say in my original post here that "We do not say that conservatives are not Christians, even though some say that of us". I am a Liberal whose group does not say Conservatives are not Christians.

Luckily it is faith that is said to matter and not being totally identical in doctrine.

Edited January 7, 2010 by Pete

[Coolhand]

I did wonder what the term "absolutely" actually meant when I am still having my friendship rejected because of what I believe. Do you remember how I have you on my list of friends but I am no longer listed on yours and have not been so for a long time.

However, I did say in my original post here that "We do not say that conservatives are not Christians, even though some say that of us". I am a Liberal whose group does not say Conservatives are not Christians.

Luckily it is faith that is said to matter and not being totally identical in doctrine.

Well don't feel like our friendship is contingent on your belief system. Don't feel like I am rejecting your friendship either. I'll fix the friend thing...lol...looks like only have 4 friends.

I am still not clear what you are saying regarding my question however. In the other topic, you and Fawzo were pretty adamant about me testifying to the validity of beliefs that are divergent from mine. I still sense skepticism from you regarding the genuineness in my answer. I was able to positively respond to you your question ( I believe you are Christian even though you are outside my denomination), and I was able to positively respond to Fawzo ( that all the religions are valid). I do not feel like this goes both ways however.

Your response (double negative) (not here to say your faith is not valid) is quite different then a simple "yes" and nowhere near an "absolutely." As a clarifying comment also, your approval or disapproval of my faith has no bearing on my dedication or feelings about my faith. Your approval or disapproval has no bearing on how I view our friendship.

I have to ask; do you feel superior to a person that believes the Bible is inerrant?

[Dan56]

Much of the criticism that is laid against the liberal school of thought is that the concept is not biblical. The answer, I give to that is that is, being not biblical is the whole point, as liberals describe the bible as a collection of documents from differing recourses, written by man, choreographed to fit some of the Old Testament writings, and not the actual infallible words of God.

Liberals do not argue that the bible is not inspiring but argue it is the fallible words of inspired men writing about their experience of Judeo-Christianity. Liberals may quote the bible but only where it has meaning to the topic being discussed but do not use it as the ultimate authority from which no argument can be placed.

If the bible is fallible, why do Liberals quote it at all? It seems to me that they believe what appeals to them and reject what doesn't suit them. The bible is where we learn about Christ, therefore, how does a person reject the bible as being the inspired Word of God while simultaneously professing to be Christian? It seems illogical and contradictory since a Christian by definition is a follower of Christ. How do you have faith in Christ when you doubt the authenticity of the Gospels which reveal who Christ was and what he taught?

[Pete]

Well don't feel like our friendship is contingent on your belief system. Don't feel like I am rejecting your friendship either. I'll fix the friend thing...lol...looks like only have 4 friends.

I am still not clear what you are saying regarding my question however. In the other topic, you and Fawzo were pretty adamant about me testifying to the validity of beliefs that are divergent from mine. I still sense skepticism from you regarding the genuineness in my answer. I was able to positively respond to you your question ( I believe you are Christian even though you are outside my denomination), and I was able to positively respond to Fawzo ( that all the religions are valid). I do not feel like this goes both ways however.

Your response (double negative) (not here to say your faith is not valid) is quite different then a simple "yes" and nowhere near an "absolutely." As a clarifying comment also, your approval or disapproval of my faith has no bearing on my dedication or feelings about my faith. Your approval or disapproval has no bearing on how I view our friendship.

I have to ask; do you feel superior to a person that believes the Bible is inerrant?

Do I feel superior to someone who believes the bible is inerrant? Strangely as it may appear otherwise Cool, I do not. I just do not accept that position for myself. The issue I have with those who see the bible as inerrant is that sometimes it can appear pretty harsh to some people. The times, I usually debate strongly is not when someone talks about their faith in the bible but when it seems like groups such as gay people are being attacked or I feel other Christianities are being described as invalid. I also believe there is a meeting place where many faiths meet. I do not think God cares whether he is called God, Goddess, Allah, Elohim, Brahma, Krishna , Father, Son, Holy Spirit, or the source of love in this world. I think God can be found in many places and that is something some with a biblical perspective often cannot see or agree with. I think God has been active in many places that we have not found possible and people have interpreted God in the best way they could. The biblical is inerrant way is just one of them (IMO).

The usual response I would get to that is "one cannot be saved under any other name". The issue I have with that is I believe the name is God (a name many would have a differing name for). I also believe the church has done its best to fabricate much that I do not believe was in there in the time of Jesus and his disciples. I also believe the church has done some terrible things using the name of Jesus (the persecution of Jews, the inquisition and the burning of witches and killing of what they called heretics to name but a few). I do not believe Jesus would have supported any of this. I also note that according to the bible Jesus never said he would send some text that would lead us, he did say he would send a comforter (I believe that to be the Holy Spirit and not the Bible). Still, I do accept the position in where we can agree to differ (as long as I do not get a hell and damnation speech). If all this does not put you off friendship then I am still an open door and always have been.

Edited January 7, 2010 by Pete

[Fawzo]

If the bible is fallible, why do Liberals quote it at all? It seems to me that they believe what appeals to them and reject what doesn't suit them. The bible is where we learn about Christ, therefore, how does a person reject the bible as being the inspired Word of God while simultaneously professing to be Christian? It seems illogical and contradictory since a Christian by definition is a follower of Christ. How do you have faith in Christ when you doubt the authenticity of the Gospels which reveal who Christ was and what he taught?

People quote Shakespeare and other revered writers all the time as well, does that prove anything of infallibility? of course not!

One can learn about various traditions of Yeshua in many non Biblical writings Dan. The Aquarian Gospel, The Gnostic Gospels etc etc.

What made you decide the Bible was the authentic representation of Yeshua. Was it because someone told you so and that the Bible was the inerrant word of God that you made your decision? Guess what this person was either ignorant of the facts or they out right lied to you. The Bible as you hold it in your hands has not and has never been an inerrant work dictated word for word by any intelligent being. The early "orthodox" church made sure of that.

[Pete]

If the bible is fallible, why do Liberals quote it at all? It seems to me that they believe what appeals to them and reject what doesn't suit them. The bible is where we learn about Christ, therefore, how does a person reject the bible as being the inspired Word of God while simultaneously professing to be Christian? It seems illogical and contradictory since a Christian by definition is a follower of Christ. How do you have faith in Christ when you doubt the authenticity of the Gospels which reveal who Christ was and what he taught?

Are you saying only conservatives/fundamentalists should use and quote the bible? Is it wrong for me be inspired by parts of it without totally taking everything as a given?

Do you think I should have some sort of licence before using the bible?

[Coolhand]

Do I feel superior to someone who believes the bible is inerrant? Strangely as it may appear otherwise Cool, I do not. I just do not accept that position for myself. The issue I have with those who see the bible as inerrant is that sometimes it can appear pretty harsh to some people. The times, I usually debate strongly is not when someone talks about their faith in the bible but when it seems like groups such as gay people are being attacked or I feel other Christianities are being described as invalid. I also believe there is a meeting place where many faiths meet. I do not think God cares whether he is called God, Goddess, Allah, Elohim, Brahma, Krishna , Father, Son, Holy Spirit, or the source of love in this world. I think God can be found in many places and that is something some with a biblical perspective often cannot see or agree with. I think God has been active in many places that we have not found possible and people have interpreted God in the best way they could. The biblical is inerrant way is just one of them (IMO).

The usual response I would get to that is "one cannot be saved under any other name". The issue I have with that is I believe the name is God (a name many would have a differing name for). I also believe the church has done its best to fabricate much that I do not believe was in there in the time of Jesus and his disciples. I also believe the church has done some terrible things using the name of Jesus (the persecution of Jews, the inquisition and the burning of witches and killing of what they called heretics to name but a few). I do not believe Jesus would have supported any of this. I also note that according to the bible Jesus never said he would send some text that would lead us, he did say he would send a comforter (I believe that to be the Holy Spirit and not the Bible). Still, I do accept the position in where we can agree to differ (as long as I do not get a hell and damnation speech). If all this does not put you off friendship then I am still an open door and always have been.

You can believe what you believe but what I think it would be much more edifying for everyone reading if you would spend time discussing what you believe, why you believe it, and how it encourages, inspires, and edifies you; instead of focusing on what you do not believe and explaing over and over why you do not believe it. You have a realationship with God and God speaks to you; I know this for a fact because of the conversations we used to have in the mornings. You can be a great encouragement to people and have been to me. Yet I never get to be blessed by your relationship with God and how he blesses you anymore because all you seem to do is go over and over why you don't believe the Bible is the word of God, and how screwed up some Christains are. They already know they are screwed up which is why are are in church and studying thier bible.

Pete, I understand that you have a different view of scripture than I do, and I do not see this as being a problem. I know that this may limit the degree to which we can fellowship because there are going to be disagreements. I don't think my relationship with God is and more valid than yours,I do not think that God prefers me over you. I do not think I am anymore Christian than you are but that we are equally Christian and brothers in Christ. I believe that you have a realtionship with God and that God speaks to you.

Can you say the same about me?

Edited January 7, 2010 by Coolhand

[Pete]

You can believe what you believe but what I think it would be much more edifying for everyone reading if you would spend time discussing what you believe, why you believe it, and how it encourages, inspires, and edifies you; instead of focusing on what you do not believe and explaing over and over why you do not believe it. You have a realationship with God and God speaks to you; I know this for a fact because of the conversations we used to have in the mornings. You can be a great encouragement to people and have been to me. Yet I never get to be blessed by your relationship with God and how he blesses you anymore because all you seem to do is go over and over why you don't believe the Bible is the word of God, and how screwed up some Christains are. They already know they are screwed up which is why are are in church and studying thier bible.

Pete, I understand that you have a different view of scripture than I do, and I do not see this as being a problem. I know that this may limit the degree to which we can fellowship because there are going to be disagreements. I don't think my relationship with God is and more valid than yours,I do not think that God prefers me over you. I do not think I am anymore Christian than you are but that we are equally Christian and brothers in Christ. I believe that you have a realtionship with God and that God speaks to you.

Can you say the same about me?

I think the problem that triggers off a debate on what I do not believe, usually starts with comments such as Dan's. I could of go off on a debate as why I do not feel that those who believe the bible is inerrant, should have the only take on the bible, but please note, I did not run into a long spiel about it this time or attack his faith.

I think the main thing in which we differ is how we see the bible. I do not see it as a book full of definite statements or events. I see it as historical take on people who had faith in God who have gone before. It may or may not be accurate in what it says (IMO) but if I feel inspired by things the writers have said, did, or stories they told then I feel I can learn from them, but where I would differ is - you are not going to get a table of beliefs or a defined creed out of me. I know this is something that conservatives would find frustrating as they may or may not have something they can fully get a handle on. I see my faith as a journey rather than a state of arrival at a full sense of defined beliefs or statements. This is something most conservatives would struggle to understand. For a conservatives, the main question is are you saved or not. This is difficult to answer from a liberal perspective because we often believe that much of this talk is about controlling people (either from Paul doing so or by the church). The presumption is if one does not declare this or that belief then they are not saved and therefore outside of the body of Christ. This sort of talk can be found in the conservative talk of most major faiths. So, talking to me about a contradictory or challenging bible verse, does not do a lot for me.

I believe in God and that God communicates to people. I believe God can be found in everyone. God is beyond our defining and is interpreted in many human ways. I believe God is loving but in a Spiritual way. The Spiritual is where I believe we return.

I am aware of the debating statement, about this life, that if God is all powerful and sees suffering but does little then God is not good. If God is all good and created all, then how come suffering exists.

I am excited by the fact the Golden rule exists within each faith and not just Judaism and Christianity. For me it appears as evidence that the hand of God is present within all.

I believe God can be heard by those who listen and seek God.

I also believe my journey may lead me to other findings and may challenge that which I believe now. I believe that being open to discover is the mark of a true seeker. Once someone presumes they know then that is where they stop listening and start telling people what they should or should not believe according to their model of the world and this life. Then I usually grow weary.

Edited January 7, 2010 by Pete

[Coolhand]

I think the problem that triggers off a debate on what I do not believe, usually starts with comments such as Dan's. I could of go off on a debate as why I do not feel that those who believe the bible is inerrant, should have the only take on the bible, but please note, I did not run into a long spiel about it this time or attack his faith.

I think the main thing in which we differ is how we see the bible. I do not see it as a book full of definite statements or events. I see it as historical take on people who had faith in God who have gone before. It may or may not be accurate in what it says (IMO) but if I feel inspired by things the writers have said, did, or stories they told then I feel I can learn from them, but where I would differ is - you are not going to get a table of beliefs or a defined creed out of me. I know this is something that conservatives would find frustrating as they may or may not have something they can fully get a handle on. I see my faith as a journey rather than a state of arrival at a full sense of defined beliefs or statements. This is something most conservatives would struggle to understand. For a conservatives, the main question is are you saved or not. This is difficult to answer from a liberal perspective because we often believe that much of this talk is about controlling people (either from Paul doing so or by the church). The presumption is if one does not declare this or that belief then they are not saved and therefore outside of the body of Christ. This sort of talk can be found in the conservative talk of most major faiths. So, talking to me about a contradictory or challenging bible verse, does not do a lot for me.

I believe in God and that God communicates to people. I believe God can be found in everyone. God is beyond our defining and is interpreted in many human ways. I believe God is loving but in a Spiritual way. The Spiritual is where I believe we return.

I am aware of the debating statement, about this life, that if God is all powerful and sees suffering but does little then God is not good. If God is all good and created all, then how come suffering exists.

I am excited by the fact the Golden rule exists within each faith and not just Judaism and Christianity. For me it appears as evidence that the hand of God is present within all.

I believe God can be heard by those who listen and seek God.

I also believe my journey may lead me to other findings and may challenge that which I believe now. I believe that being open to discover is the mark of a true seeker. Once someone presumes they know then that is where they stop listening and start telling people what they should or should not believe according to their model of the world and this life. Then I usually grow weary.

You are going in a lot of different directions there Pete. In regard to my post:

Pete, I understand that you have a different view of scripture than I do, and I do not see this as being a problem. I know that this may limit the degree to which we can fellowship because there are going to be disagreements. I don't think my relationship with God is and more valid than yours,I do not think that God prefers me over you. I do not think I am anymore Christian than you are but that we are equally Christian and brothers in Christ. I believe that you have a realtionship with God and that God speaks to you.

Can you say the same about me?

I can see the answer is no. Has it occurred to you that contradicting yourself? You say that conservative Christians will not validate the faith of liberal Christians, yet here you have me (which could be classified as a conservative Christian according to your criteria) that will enthusiastically validate your faith but you will not validate mine.

Or maybe will are but it is buried deep in your criticism of Dan, the Bible, conservatives, Paul, and the church and I missed it.

[Pete]

You are going in a lot of different directions there Pete. In regard to my post:

I can see the answer is no. Has it occurred to you that contradicting yourself? You say that conservative Christians will not validate the faith of liberal Christians, yet here you have me (which could be classified as a conservative Christian according to your criteria) that will enthusiastically validate your faith but you will not validate mine.

Or maybe will are but it is buried deep in your criticism of Dan, the Bible, conservatives, Paul, and the church and I missed it.

I have recognised you as a Christian. However, I do not need validation from anyone as to whether I have a faith or not. That is between myself and God. I also suspect that is how you see things. All I really asked is do you see myself as a Christian but with differing views (something I view of you) or someone with a faith aligned to Christianity but not quite making it (so to speak).

I ask this only because I have never met many conservatives that tolerate divergence on the use of scripture (Dan comment for instance). I also recall you saying that I had ruined a friendship because I had diversified from the conservative view. I said to you that my friendship did not depend on another person sharing my faith (and that still stands).

Also I do not feel my criticism was that buried with regard to Dan's attempt to chastise me for using the bible and not seeing things in his way. Sadly that is the way I usually experience conservatives.

Maybe, my post appears in differing directions but that is my attempt to explain things.

Edited January 7, 2010 by Pete

[Dan56]

People quote Shakespeare and other revered writers all the time as well, does that prove anything of infallibility? of course not!

Nothing wrong with quoting material, but doesn't calling oneself a Christian imply a belief in Christ? If I thought the bible was a collection of fables, then I would not be a Christian because I would not believe the bible. People quote Shakespeare knowing he was a fictional writer, its an appreciation of fiction and not a confirmation of faith. Infallibility has nothing to do with it.

Are you saying only conservatives/fundamentalists should use and quote the bible? Is it wrong for me be inspired by parts of it without totally taking everything as a given?

Do you think I should have some sort of licence before using the bible?

Of course not.. But it just seems illogical to refer to oneself as Christian when they don't believe the words they quote from the bible. You can be inspired by a philosophy that you embrace, but does that equate to belief? I'm not questioning what you believe or your right to quote anything, I just have trouble grasping how someone can be Christian while simultaneously denying that everything written about Jesus is true? If you presume the bible is false, isn't Liberal Christianity based on a lie? Or is it referred to as 'Liberal' because its a partial belief in Christ?

You say that conservative Christians will not validate the faith of liberal Christians, yet here you have me (which could be classified as a conservative Christian according to your criteria) that will enthusiastically validate your faith but you will not validate mine.

How can anyone validate what they themselves don't believe? The liberal view rejects Christ as the Son of God, and their salvation is not reliant on Christ. How can you validate and embrace that position without undermining what you believe? We can surely respect each others beliefs, but to find validity in what another person thinks requires a degree of agreement. Doesn't it? If I believe the bible and someone else doesn't believe it, then I can't very well expect them to validate what I think.

[Coolhand]

I have recognised you as a Christian. However, I do not need validation from anyone as to whether I have a faith or not. That is between myself and God. I also suspect that is how you see things. All I really asked is do you see myself as a Christian but with differing views (something I view of you) or someone with a faith aligned to Christianity but not quite making it (so to speak).

I ask this only because I have never met many conservatives that tolerate divergence on the use of scripture (Dan comment for instance). I also recall you saying that I had ruined a friendship because I had diversified from the conservative view. I said to you that my friendship did not depend on another person sharing my faith (and that still stands).

Also I do not feel my criticism was that buried with regard to Dan's attempt to chastise me for using the bible and not seeing things in his way. Sadly that is the way I usually experience conservatives.

Maybe, my post appears in differing directions but that is my attempt to explain things.

Pete; I love you bro, and I am just going to let this go. I was just looking for a yes or no answer to this:

Pete, I understand that you have a different view of scripture than I do, and I do not see this as being a problem. I know that this may limit the degree to which we can fellowship because there are going to be disagreements. I don't think my relationship with God is and more valid than yours,I do not think that God prefers me over you. I do not think I am anymore Christian than you are but that we are equally Christian and brothers in Christ. I believe that you have a realtionship with God and that God speaks to you.

Can you say the same about me?

God bless.

[Pete]

Pete; I love you bro, and I am just going to let this go. I was just looking for a yes or no answer to this:

God bless.

Cool, if you want to email me then please feel free.

Dan, I find it hard to discuss with you as I believe you have a strong idea of how you think things should be and I feel I do not fit in there.

The world as I see it is full of variance and diversity and yet, do you believe, God can speak to all according to the language of their hearts?

I do.

Edited January 7, 2010 by Pete

[Coolhand]

How can anyone validate what they themselves don't believe? The liberal view rejects Christ as the Son of God, and their salvation is not reliant on Christ. How can you validate and embrace that position without undermining what you believe? We can surely respect each others beliefs, but to find validity in what another person thinks requires a degree of agreement. Doesn't it? If I believe the bible and someone else doesn't believe it, then I can't very well expect them to validate what I think.

Well it isn't that difficult Dan. The way I see it is it as simple as allowing God to be God and me recognizing what can do and what I cannot do.