Remember that old Microsoft tag line? "Where do you want to go today?" I wonder the same things in the midst of some "agreeable" conversations.
The discussion on essentials reminded me of the old line -- "Two people separated by a common language." (For those who took part in the dialog, I'm not directly speaking to anything anyone said. The conversation just brought this to mind.)
In terms of "essentials" when it comes to the essentials of salvation, we'd like to think, "All you have to do is put your faith in Christ and you're saved." My, my, how simple that is. We should all be in major agreement here. How nice!
And then I ask, "Where do you want to go today?" If you're from the Oneness group, you are going to have to explain who "Christ" is. This "Christ" is not the same one I have in mind. This one is "God", the only one. That is, there is no "God the Father" or "God the Holy Spirit" ... just Jesus -- God. Okay, so ... now you've gone somewhere else. Or if you're from another group, "faith in Christ" simply means "I trust in the goodness that was attributed to a mythical person we know as Jesus and want to be a good person, too." Nope, not the same Christ. You've gone another place.
"Saved" takes on its own meanings. To me, it's "saved from the just wrath of God". "Oh, no," another will assure me, "God has no wrath. It's just saved from being the person you shouldn't be. You know ... saved from sin." Others are quite certain that they're saved from discomfort, pain, illness, unhappiness. And, again, we've gone different places.
What about "faith"? What does that mean? Oh, that's easy. It just means it's something you agree with -- mental assent. Or is it something in which you put your confidence? Maybe it's something that motivates you to act? Maybe all of the above ... or none? And again we're going a variety of places.
And we end up back at the real original question. Is there a basic "essential" doctrine that defines what it means first and foremost to be "Christian"? Clearly the question isn't as easily answered as "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ", even though the Bible puts it that way. With so many variations on "believe", "Jesus", and "salvation", perhaps you can begin to see why it's not such a simple question. And that it's wise to find out, "Where do you want to go today?"
6 comments:
IS there a basic essential doctrine? Sure, God saves us by God's grace through faith in Jesus, just as the Bible says.
More good doctrine to keep in mind, as it relates to differences within the Body of Christ:
I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace...
And God gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ
~Eph 4
Clearly that text you're quoting was a cultural text, intended to talk about the kindness of God towards all human beings. For some reason you're taking it in a woodenly literal sense ...
Dan, I asked you a question before and you have not answered. I asked what you would prefer from me. I have limited options. 1) I can toss out my entire theology and take up yours and then I wouldn't be saying anything with which you would feel the need to disagree. Of course, I wouldn't be consistent with my own understanding, but that's not your problem, is it? Or 2) I could stop caring at all about anyone and whether or not they actually have a functioning relationship with God. If they are indeed going to Hell, that's their problem. At least I won't be saying anything to offend anyone. I'll be "keeping the peace." Or, 3) I can continue to read my Bible and understand it the best I can and, if I see stuff that concerns me regarding the welfare of others, I can continue to warn them, knowing that many will not accept what I have to say.
You know ... that is about all of my options. You are really quite set on the idea that I'm doing this wrong (Option 3). So I am really interested in what other option you would recommend.
Hang on to what you think is right, by all means! Even if I disagree with you - even if the WHOLE WORLD disagrees with you - you have a responsibility to strive to discern God's Will for yourself.
All I'm suggesting is you do so in humility and without demonizing the Others, those you disagree with. Of course, if you think God wants you to demonize the Others, then I guess you ought to do so, although I'd recommend you reconsider.
In the meantime, I shall continue to do the same. Now, if I happen to agree with you, I hope you don't mind when I stop in and say, "Right on!" as I have from time to time.
When I partially agree with you, I hope you won't mind if I note where I agree and where I part from your thinking.
And when I disagree with you, I hope you don't mind hearing from me, offering my opinion on what's right, logical, good and/or Christian for your consideration.
I enjoy talking about areas where we ("we" in the generic sense, not just you and me) disagree. It helps me think my position through. It gives me something to consider.
My main area of concern is not so much the disagreements as it is when someone misrepresents the Other, as I think we can all agree that this is not ideal for communication.
But, by all means, seek God for thyself, with fear and trembling, recognizing your own position as yet another flawed human being, prone to error and sometimes unduly influenced by tradition and "the way I've always understood it." I'd ask nothing else.
Dan Trabue: "All I'm suggesting is you do so in humility and without demonizing the Others, those you disagree with."
I'm not at all sure what you mean by "demonizing". If I say, "They're wrong", is that demonizing? If I say, "They're leading you in the wrong direction" is that demonizing? I don't think you'll often hear me say (see me write), "They're arch-heretics!" That might be "demonizing" (although if they are arch-heretics, is it?).
If someone is leading people from the truth and leading them toward destruction, what should I say that isn't "demonizing" but points out the fact that they're leading them from the truth and toward destruction?
what should I say that isn't "demonizing" but points out the fact that they're leading them from the truth and toward destruction?
Stick to the facts. If you think a study is flawed, provide factual data as to why you think the study is flawed.
On the other hand, if no one associated with the study or who draw conclusions from such studies that we ought to be concerned, don't suggest that what they really want is to wipe out all of humanity.
THAT'S what I mean by "demonizing." That is, don't describe the people as if they were demons.
Simple enough? Fair enough?
Stan said...
I'm not at all sure what you mean by "demonizing".
More examples...
If someone says they believe in the Christus Victor theory of Atonement, disagreeing in love would say something like, "I disagree, with that approach, and here's why..."
The demonizing approach would say, "Well then, you are clearly not a Christian, unless you accept atonement in THIS way (ransom, substitutionary) as the ONLY way, you are no Christian."
If someone says, "I don't believe the Bible says that all homosexuality is a sin, in fact, I think that gay marriage is a good thing and not condemned by God or the Bible (since it doesn't appear in the Bible)..."
Disagreeing in love would say something like, "Well, I disagree with your position and here's why..."
Demonizing would say, "You think God blesses promiscuity?! Do you also think God blesses bestiality??! No, gay marriage IS wrong and anyone who disagrees must hate the Bible and not care what God thinks! No one could possibly think God's message is unclear on the point - your acceptance of gay marriage makes me question your Christianity..."
You get my point? Disagree with love and rational points. We ought not misrepresent positions or suggest they believe things they have not said they believe - that they have said they do NOT believe.
And when mistakes happen and one accidentally misstates the Other's position, the loving Christian approach is to strive to acknowledge the mistake and correct it or try to better understand where they went wrong. The demonizing approach is to ignore the misstatement or even repeat it.
Disagree if you think someone is wrong, but do so in love and with respect and strive for factuality, not rumors and innuendo.
Post a Comment