Liberal Christianity 2

[Coolhand]

No one can supply hope to another.

You can be the reason, you can become the catalyst

for someone else to "build hope" out of their own

emotional, intellectual and spiritual resources.

But you cannot provide hope to another.

So, I'm sorry, but I can't give it to you.

I agree with you, though I state things differently.

If love is not unconditional, then, IMO, it is not love but possessiveness (lust) and manipulation. Because I love you does not mean that I cannot rebuke you or, if you are my child punish you after fair warning.

Unconditional love does not imply a lack or absence of discipline.

In a marraige relationship it takes two. If one love the other, but the other becomes indiffernt, the reltionaship is doomed. Without adding more to it than what it is saying, that is the Ah'hava love in the Hebrew Scriptures that the Agape in the Greek is supposed to be translating.

[RevRainbow]

I think we should pray and fast for you and your parents. I think it is major wrong to accuse anyone of a lack of faith when they do not see the manifestaion of a healing that is being prayed for. You are not the problem and I would disagree with anyone that would tell you are. We should pray and not give up. I am up for it.

The way I see it is that you are part of my family Pete, and these are attacks on you and your family.

God had promised that He is our healer.

Im 100 percent with Coolhand on this. It is a sin for someone to tell you or your parents that it was a lack of faith on their part as to why you were not healed. What a lousy excuse to hand someone for their failure. You are part of this family, as Cool says. We may argue and disagree, but we are family, dysfunctional as it might seem at times. I will join in prayer as the Spirit leads me if you request it, Pete. I am certain others will also. God says to keep banging on the door until He answers and, if we ask for bread, He wont give us rocks. Peace.

In a marraige relationship it takes two. If one love the other, but the other becomes indiffernt, the reltionaship is doomed. Without adding more to it than what it is saying, that is the Ah'hava love in the Hebrew Scriptures that the Agape in the Greek is supposed to be translating.

Been there, done that; see your point. I can understand that definition.

[Raven's Trikes]

I ain't buying it. You can try and sell it all you want, but I don't buy it .... just not my cup of tea...

Edited June 28, 2010 by Ravenstrikes

[Coolhand]

You know something Cool. I have nursed the sick most of my life and in my experience there is no better out come from those who had faith and those who did not. Lets also talk about glory with something real that I have witnessed. My parents have prayed to Jesus and in Jesus' name and worshiped God all their lives. My father has recently had a stroke and does not know where he is or remember my mothers name despite seeing her. My mother has fibrosis of the lungs that will eventually kill her but meanwhile she is being dogged by cancer. So now, you tell me that all will be well if we pray through Jesus' name and there is hope, but hell mate, I have to say I do not feel it at present. Do I feel like glorifying the biblical god and believing all is okay in Jesus' name? Put yourself in my place and tell me you would feel hope and lets not forget the churches that prayed over me to heal my disability and blamed my parents for not having enough faith when I was not healed.

Well you want it real and real you have got it.

All I hear is rhetoric but unfortunately Cool, in the real world rhetoric does not answer questions.

A question to the people who are participating in this discussion:

Can we join together and pray about these things?

This is the real deal here. To me, this is the difference between theology and philosophy; and like Pete says the difference between rhetoric and answers. Notice in the gospels right before Jesus healed people, he became filled with compassion, and then the healing power of God was released. Can you feel this compassion? Let's do this, together. If you object to committing to daily prayer for these needs expressed, please state why.

[Tsukino_Rei]

Actually this particular question WAS rhetorical...

(The only question I wanted answered was "which of us created a dichotomy?")

Perhaps I should have shown more stress on the word: "supposed".

Let me put it otherwise:

Why should I be obliged to supply you with hope?

That is not my responsibility.

You should not expect to find hope when you first confront a truth.

You should be troubled by it:

Jesus said,

1 "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find.

2 When they find, they will be disturbed.

3 When they are disturbed, they will marvel,

4 and will rule over all."

Logion 2, Gospel of Thomas

No one can supply hope to another.

You can be the reason, you can become the catalyst

for someone else to "build hope" out of their own

emotional, intellectual and spiritual resources.

But you cannot provide hope to another.

So, I'm sorry, but I can't give it to you.

I am not sure that I can even begin to explain to you (or to anyone)

how it is that knowing that good and evil are inside of us all,

that there is no safe place where one can hide from evil,

why knowing this doesn't bother me...but it doesn't.

What I know is that each of us has to "construct his own bravery",

each of us has to "create his own hopeful vision",

in the face of "whatever truths" he encounter in life.

Wow Hex! That's some food for thought. And it ain't baby formula! Reading your post it occurs to me that the responsibility to find hope for ourselves is necessary to free-will. If the discovery and wisdom were simply injected unto us with no individual mental or spiritual participation then we'd be robots. It's through our mental processes of internalization that what we learn becomes part of who we are and what we project to the world. It is as Tolkein wrote - we are little creators.

Edited June 28, 2010 by Tsukino_Rei

[Pete]

A question to the people who are participating in this discussion:

Can we join together and pray about these things?

This is the real deal here. To me, this is the difference between theology and philosophy; and like Pete says the difference between rhetoric and answers. Notice in the gospels right before Jesus healed people, he became filled with compassion, and then the healing power of God was released. Can you feel this compassion? Let's do this, together. If you object to committing to daily prayer for these needs expressed, please state why.

I appreciate the prayers of others and I admit I am in pain over it, but I will stick to my point. Its not enough to quote this or that and say it gives hope. It does not (IMO). What gives me hope is the belief that this (life now) is not all there is and that hope is something from my personal journey and not because it is quoted in the bible.

It is not the mark of a loving all powerful God as described in the bible to create and to not intervene in the suffering that is caused by what has been created. My problems are minute compared with many in this world and that suffering is great on some. The hope that exists is not from quotes or a belief on a book but a spiritual belief. If God has to be measured by creation then all I have to say is what a cruel God. If God is measured by the spiritual influence on things then I can see an influence, even if I do not always see many of the problems that exist on this world changing very soon.

For me the spirit is like this. If rain falls on a plant in the desert, then it grows and thrives, but that has not changed the fact that the plant is an hostile environment in the desert.

Like the rain it is on a spiritual level that I see interventions by God. On the material side of things I am stuck with the question "why".

That why is based on why an all powerful loving God as the bible describes could not create what he wanted in the first place and save us from all this suffering. Why has there been so little intervention and why judge people on the basis of a single belief , when good people are found in every creed and belief in the world.

Yes, and why did 6 million Jews have to die and so many others have to die to stop that and other evils of the war. For me to say its because they did not call out in Jesus' name is heartless and unworthy of any loving God.

[Bro. Hex]

A question to the people who are participating in this discussion:

(A) Can we join together and pray about these things?

(B) If you object to committing to daily prayer for these needs expressed, please state why.

With regard to (A) above,

Why?

You come up with an idea, and suddenly we are all supposed to do it?

Is that how it works in your interactions "with your equals"?

Who put you "in charge"???

Why do you need "everyone else" to join you in prayer

"for these needs expressed" (whatever those were)?

Can't you do it "on your own"?

With regard to (B) above,

Your humility is breathtaking...in its absence.

What makes you think that you are ENTITLED to know the reason,

if anyone should be so bold as to say: "count me out"?

I am very familiar with many of the techniques and tactics of mind control,

and "why don't we pray about this together?" in a well recognized classic.

And the very simple act of "going along" with one of the "Why don't we..." questions,

automatically confers a perceived status of (he is the leader)

in the subconscious of any one who "goes along".

(There, I just gave you "just one" of the many reasons I have for declining your summons...

and that's "one-more than you are entitled to".)

No, thank you.

You are most certainly NOT my leader.

It is time for you to start treating others here AS YOUR EQUAL...

or reap the consequent harvest.

And you are most certainly NOT ENTITLED to know my reason

for not agreeing to do precisely what you are demanding

(in ever so coy terms) that we all should agree to do.

Thanks for reminding me why I hate prayer groups!

Edited June 28, 2010 by Hexalpa

[Coolhand]

With regard to (A) above,

Why?

You come up with an idea, and suddenly we are all supposed to do it?

Is that how it works in your interactions "with your equals"?

Who put you "in charge"???

Why do you need "everyone else" to join you in prayer

"for these needs expressed" (whatever those were)?

Can't you do it "on your own"?

With regard to (B) above,

Your humility is breathtaking...in its absence.

What makes you think that you are ENTITLED to know the reason,

if anyone should be so bold as to say: "count me out"?

I am very familiar with many of the techniques and tactics of mind control,

and "why don't we pray about this together?" in a well recognized classic.

And the very simple act of "going along" with one of the "Why don't we..." questions,

automatically confers a perceived status of (he is the leader)

in the subconscious of any one who "goes along".

(There, I just gave you "just one" of the many reasons I have for declining your summons...

and that's "one-more than you are entitled to".)

No, thank you.

You are most certainly NOT my leader.

It is time for you to start treating others here AS YOUR EQUAL...

or reap the consequent harvest.

And you are most certainly NOT ENTITLED to know my reason

for not agreeing to do precisely what you are demanding

(in ever so coy terms) that we all should agree to do.

Thanks for reminding me why I hate prayer groups!

Wow. There is only one “leader” which is God. I think you may be missing the point.

[RevRainbow]

Cool, while I stated I agreed with you in regards to the actions of those who had prayed for Pete, and agree also on the power of prayer, I encouraged Pete that I would pray, if requested. I am somewhat taken aback by your subsequent response especially demanding a reason if someone decided not to pray with you. Methinks you need to reconsider your words.

I understand Hex's response, and he is, no doubt, not alone. I would expect the same response had I posted the "call to prayer" as you did. Christians who are as rigid in their fundamentalism as you, are few on this forum and, sometimes, your method of approach to the diverse majority, leaves even other Christians gasping. I understand where you are coming from (I was there, and still am partially). It is not so much that I disagree with you, but with your approach. Others, you must consider, do not understand at all and are offended.

Prayer is a personal thing. It can be participated in by groups, certainly, and this can be encouraged. You must remember that in this forum, many are being led (or lead themselves) in different approaches, and different methods of prayer perhaps foreign to us Christians. When someone posts a prayer request in the topic area, I am not required to answer that I will pray even if I do. If I am requested to pray, I will, as led by the Spirit and not someone else. If someone actually posts a prayer, I may give my amen to it and maybe not but that is no indication that I do not have compassion on the requester.

I am told, as a Christian, to come boldly to the throne of Grace. I do not have to grovel. Also, as far as fasting, perhaps some do the old fashion way, but I refer you to the book of Isaiah 58: 3-7. While I agree we can fast through denying ourselves food, it is for our benefit rather than God's, as a means to assure ourselves of our sincerity since God already knows our hearts.

On this forum, where the call to prayer will result in a diverse response of participants (note the prayer topic) and responses, I feel it is highly presumptuous to expect others to pray as I do, nor would I ever demand a reason for their not praying - their way or mine. And remember, there will be quite a few who will not be praying in Jesus' Name.

Edited June 28, 2010 by RevRainbow

[Coolhand]

I appreciate the prayers of others and I admit I am in pain over it, but I will stick to my point. Its not enough to quote this or that and say it gives hope. It does not (IMO). What gives me hope is the belief that this (life now) is not all there is and that hope is something from my personal journey and not because it is quoted in the bible.

It is not the mark of a loving all powerful God as described in the bible to create and to not intervene in the suffering that is caused by what has been created. My problems are minute compared with many in this world and that suffering is great on some. The hope that exists is not from quotes or a belief on a book but a spiritual belief. If God has to be measured by creation then all I have to say is what a cruel God. If God is measured by the spiritual influence on things then I can see an influence, even if I do not always see many of the problems that exist on this world changing very soon.

For me the spirit is like this. If rain falls on a plant in the desert, then it grows and thrives, but that has not changed the fact that the plant is an hostile environment in the desert.

Like the rain it is on a spiritual level that I see interventions by God. On the material side of things I am stuck with the question "why".

That why is based on why an all powerful loving God as the bible describes could not create what he wanted in the first place and save us from all this suffering. Why has there been so little intervention and why judge people on the basis of a single belief , when good people are found in every creed and belief in the world.

Yes, and why did 6 million Jews have to die and so many others have to die to stop that and other evils of the war. For me to say its because they did not call out in Jesus' name is heartless and unworthy of any loving God.

I agree that it is not enough to quote this or that and expect that to change anything. Action is the key, and I agree with that.

I had suggested that based on the Bible as it describes the promises of God and the authority of God; it tells us to pray in this authority with the expectation that the need with be met and the need will be met. Yet, this text is rejected, questioned, and maligned by so many and its imperatives are flatly ignored.

I would argue that the Bible cannot logically ignored and then deemed ineffective and inaccurate for its principles and imperatives not working by people who will not apply them. It is like putting a model together but refusing to use the instructions and then saying the instruction don’t work.

I feel you are looking for an answer that is not given in the biblical text or in any other theological or philosophical system. Evil already existed when the Bible narrative starts. Evil was intruded upon when the creation narrative starts. We have nothing but philosophical theory regarding the start of evil; assuming it had a start. Based on the information we have it would not be unreasonable to assume that it has always existed. But we do see- in the Bible- that an end to evil is predicted.

[Coolhand]

Cool, while I stated I agreed with you in regards to the actions of those who had prayed for Pete, and agree also on the power of prayer, I encouraged Pete that I would pray, if requested. I am somewhat taken aback by your subsequent response especially demanding a reason if someone decided not to pray with you. Methinks you need to reconsider your words.

I understand Hex's response, and he is, no doubt, not alone. I would expect the same response had I posted the "call to prayer" as you did. Christians who are as rigid in their fundamentalism as you, are few on this forum and, sometimes, your method of approach to the diverse majority, leaves even other Christians gasping. I understand where you are coming from (I was there, and still am partially). It is not so much that I disagree with you, but with your approach. Others, you must consider, do not understand at all and are offended.

Prayer is a personal thing. It can be participated in by groups, certainly, and this can be encouraged. You must remember that in this forum, many are being led (or lead themselves) in different approaches, and different methods of prayer perhaps foreign to us Christians. When someone posts a prayer request in the topic area, I am not required to answer that I will pray even if I do. If I am requested to pray, I will, as led by the Spirit and not someone else. If someone actually posts a prayer, I may give my amen to it and maybe not but that is no indication that I do not have compassion on the requester.

I am told, as a Christian, to come boldly to the throne of Grace. I do not have to grovel. Also, as far as fasting, perhaps some do the old fashion way, but I refer you to the book of Isaiah 58: 3-7. While I agree we can fast through denying ourselves food, it is for our benefit rather than God's, as a means to assure ourselves of our sincerity since God already knows our hearts.

On this forum, where the call to prayer will result in a diverse response of participants (note the prayer topic) and responses, I feel it is highly presumptuous to expect others to pray as I do, nor would I ever demand a reason for their not praying - their way or mine. And remember, there will be quite a few who will not be praying in Jesus' Name.

Again, it is really not about who "calls" the prayer effort, it is about having compassion for someone and standing in the gap for for them. I suspect now we are going to see the true differences between liberal Christianity and Biblical Christianity.

Is the arrogant one the one that calls everyone to action, or is the arrogant one the one that refuses to take action because he dislikes the the method or the person used to call people to action?

[Fawzo]

I agree that it is not enough to quote this or that and expect that to change anything. Action is the key, and I agree with that.

I had suggested that based on the Bible as it describes the promises of God and the authority of God; it tells us to pray in this authority with the expectation that the need with be met and the need will be met. Yet, this text is rejected, questioned, and maligned by so many and its imperatives are flatly ignored.

I would argue that the Bible cannot logically ignored and then deemed ineffective and inaccurate for its principles and imperatives not working by people who will not apply them. It is like putting a model together but refusing to use the instructions and then saying the instruction don't work.

I feel you are looking for an answer that is not given in the biblical text or in any other theological or philosophical system. Evil already existed when the Bible narrative starts. Evil was intruded upon when the creation narrative starts. We have nothing but philosophical theory regarding the start of evil; assuming it had a start. Based on the information we have it would not be unreasonable to assume that it has always existed. But we do see- in the Bible- that an end to evil is predicted.

An experiment was held once where people prayed to the Christian God for a specific result and others prayed to an empty milk jug. The percentage of prayers answered by both were pretty much equal.

I think all the Christians here have known many people and groups in instances where people have prayed in the name of Jesus and have gotten squat,

The response will be that they ask amiss, so it seems to me that it is not the name of Jesus from which prayers are answered but the intention and harmonic relationship one has with deity that is important.

[Bro. Hex]

I suspect now we are going to see the true differences between liberal Christianity and Biblical Christianity.

We already did, and it isn't pretty.

"Fundamentalist" Christianity is controlling,

condescending and extremely arrogant.

BTW:

I do NOT concede the term "Biblical"

to the Fundamentalists, who seem to think that they have an exclusive

claim to the Bible (yet more arrogance)...

Liberal Christians, our Jewish brethren,

and even some nondenominational or unclassifiable groups,

such as the U-U, all use the Bible as the Spirit moves us/them.

Get down off of your "Biblical horse".

Edited June 28, 2010 by Hexalpa

[RevRainbow]

Perhaps we should term it "Biblical Interpretive Christianity."

Here is my FUNDAMENTAL belief:

"God IS, and He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

[Pete]

Again, it is really not about who "calls" the prayer effort, it is about having compassion for someone and standing in the gap for for them. I suspect now we are going to see the true differences between liberal Christianity and Biblical Christianity.

Is the arrogant one the one that calls everyone to action, or is the arrogant one the one that refuses to take action because he dislikes the the method or the person used to call people to action?

Look Cool, I can accept a prayer request as an act of compassion as I can those who say they send me energies or well wishes. The thing that I think that has upset people is the statement " Let's do this, together. If you object to committing to daily prayer for these needs expressed, please state why. "

It does sound condescending and school teacher like and quiet frankly I would not want prayers or giving of energies or well wishes under such term. Hex, Fawzo, Rev Rainbow,Tsukino Rei, Dan, and you, and many others on the forum, are compassionate people and I am know that all care and in that I do not want people put on the spot and asked to explain themselves.

Anyway, I used the situation to add emphasis of a point and I am sure others have similar events in their lives that they could use too.

I personally pray for all and I am sure others will do what seems right for them. Request or not..

[Coolhand]

We already did, and it isn't pretty.

"Fundamentalist" Christianity is controlling,

condescending and extremely arrogant.

BTW:

I do NOT concede the term "Biblical"

to the Fundamentalists, who seem to think that they have an exclusive

claim to the Bible (yet more arrogance)...

Liberal Christians, our Jewish brethren,

and even some nondenominational or unclassifiable groups,

such as the U-U, all use the Bible as the Spirit moves us/them.

Get down off of your "Biblical horse".

Biblical, fundamental....whichever. I have bee using "biblical" in this discussion because it seemed logical due the the difference of opinion is based on biblical understanding and interpretation. We can call it whatever you want.

We seem to have some disagreement regarding 'how' the spirit moves between fundamantalist, liberal Christians, Jewish, and UU. I do think it would be nice if we could articulate theological difference.

[Coolhand]

An experiment was held once where people prayed to the Christian God for a specific result and others prayed to an empty milk jug. The percentage of prayers answered by both were pretty much equal.

I think all the Christians here have known many people and groups in instances where people have prayed in the name of Jesus and have gotten squat,

The response will be that they ask amiss, so it seems to me that it is not the name of Jesus from which prayers are answered but the intention and harmonic relationship one has with deity that is important.

Jesus and the other New Testament writers make is a point to mention praying in the name of Jesus. There are promises that action from God that will follow these prayers of faith.

If you are convinced that this model is a failure and does not work, fine. My question to you would then be: "How do you go about it?"

Fundamentalists ask for God's help and expect supernatural things to follow. Liberal Christians seems to use the example of Jesus as a model for them to do thier acts of kindness and charity. I'm not downing that, I think that is admirable.

What confuses me however, is that if your charitable works are only those of which the men and women involved can accomplish, how then to do you ever witness the supernatural in your ministry?

It is becoming more obvious to me that liberal Christians do not see the supernatural because they do not believe in the supernatural. Which would seem to me that they do works of charity and kindness (which is great), but miralces may not be part of the liberal Christian ministry.

[Coolhand]

Look Cool, I can accept a prayer request as an act of compassion as I can those who say they send me energies or well wishes. The thing that I think that has upset people is the statement " Let's do this, together. If you object to committing to daily prayer for these needs expressed, please state why. "

It does sound condescending and school teacher like and quiet frankly I would not want prayers or giving of energies or well wishes under such term. Hex, Fawzo, Rev Rainbow,Tsukino Rei, Dan, and you, and many others on the forum, are compassionate people and I am know that all care and in that I do not want people put on the spot and asked to explain themselves.

Anyway, I used the situation to add emphasis of a point and I am sure others have similar events in their lives that they could use too.

I personally pray for all and I am sure others will do what seems right for them. Request or not..

I'm sorry Pete. My comment regarding "please state why" was meant to be taken in a theological sense, being that this is a discussion regarding the differnces between liberal and fundamental Christianity. It was not meant to be taken in the way that it seems to have been taken. It was worded vague enough however that I understand why (now) people took it that way. All I can do is say I am sorry; that was not my intent.

I will say this about fundamentlist Christians, they seem to have a lot less rules regarding praying. Anybody that feels led to can lead prayer on anything and nobody has a problem with it, or even looks at it in a condescending way.

But the bottom line is, I was not taking into consideration th cultural context of the board and participants in this dicsussion.

My apologies to all.

[Bro. Hex]

It is becoming more obvious to me that liberal Christians do not see the supernatural because they do not believe in the supernatural. Which would seem to me that they do works of charity and kindness (which is great), but miracles may not be part of the liberal Christian ministry.

I really think that it would be more productive, instead of surmising "what Liberal Christians see",

to simply ask that question.

If you want my answer, and please know that I do not speak for all Liberal Christians,

I would have several things to say in reply, that you might better understand:

(1) Liberal Christians do not "all believe the same things"...especially when it comes to

"what we can know from the historic record" as opposed to "what is pious story-telling";

well-intentioned, perhaps even edifying, but not necessarily historically factual.

(2) No one "speaks for" Liberal Christianity (authoritatively).

There are as many potential "speakers" as there are Liberal Christians.

(3) To conclude that "Liberal Christians do not see the supernatural" is a grave error.

First of all, it is an overly vast generalization. It comes from thinking "all Liberal Christians see the same way", which is also "not so". Secondly, it wouldn't be true if you were even to say "most". Most of the Liberal Christians "that I personally know" don't fit this description. Most Liberal Christians that I know would answer "Of course I believe in the Spiritual" (a word that many of us, myself included, might prefer to the word "supernatural", which can also call to mind goblins, witches casting spells, and the dead speaking through seances).

(4) It is wrong to conclude that "Liberal Christians don't believe in miracles".

I know that I do. I know that many of my kindred do also, but again, no one speaks for all of us.

(5) It is wrong to assume that Liberal Christians do not believe in "the power of prayer".

Because I would say that "most do".

Where I think you might find a difference of perspective, is in your belief (I assume that you believe this) that "you can obtain a miracle by asking for one". I know that I personally do not believe that to be true.

Now that I am getting into the realm of my own personal beliefs, I caution you "not to assume" that All Liberal Christians think like me. They don't. (So far as I know.)

I personally do not believe in "asking God for favors". I personally don't believe that "asking for something" is the true purpose of prayer. I think that prayer can be an effective means of "altering who you are". Which would naturally indicate that prayer, for me, is a pretty personal thing.

Essentially, when speaking to God, I think that prayer is best reserved for "saying thank you",

and not for saying "please".

Please do not quote scripture at me telling me why you think otherwise...I already know why you think otherwise. I already know the scripture. I am not asking why Fundamentalist Christians are the way they are. I am just trying to correct your misunderstanding of "who Liberal Christians are"; a misunderstanding that is revealed to me "by your words", which I have highlighted in the quote above.

Peace.

Edited June 28, 2010 by Hexalpa

[Coolhand]

(4) It is wrong to conclude that "Liberal Christians don't believe in miracles".

I know that I do. I know that many of my kindred do also, but again, no one speaks for all of us.

Miracles, like what?