UnderGround Forums
 

HolyGround >> Shared Christian Beliefs...


2/28/11 9:38 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
TheStewedOwl
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/8/02
Posts: 7531
Interesting quotes from St. Augustine, Juijitsuboxer - Thanks.
2/28/11 10:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
TheStewedOwl
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/8/02
Posts: 7533
Ridgeback 

I have more respect for a person who embraces a tradition because he believes it is the most loyal to the teachings of Jesus rather than failing to choose anything because he only knows he himself is right compared to them and pretends that Jesus said nothing about a church.  I think a Calvinist who accepts Calvin is far more humble than an independent who only accepts himself.  One is saying he knows, at least, that he alone doesn't hold the truth, while the other will accept no truth but his own.  

Why go for bare bones instead of fullness?  Imagine a husband who wants to get his relationship with his wife down to the bare essentials so he asks her to specify the minimum he must do to retain her as a wife.  Stripping Christianity down to its bones only became an issue when people became nervous about the rapid multiplication of sects.<br type="_moz" />


Well put.
2/28/11 10:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/28/11 10:40 PM
Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3743
Imagine a husband who wants to get ensure that his wife understands what a real marriage is, and provides her a list of requirements that she must meet for it to be considered a valid marriage. These requirements include such things as only using certain types of dish soap, and washing dishes only on certain days of the week; she can only wear certain types of clothing, and none of her family is permitted to come to their house to visit. If she doesn't meet these requirements he will divorce her.
 
Ridge, I understand your point that some traditions are rich and within them a believer may find fulness of the church, tradition, history, grace, and so on. I'm not disputing that at all, and I think for you Orthodoxy answers a lot of questions. In fact, traditions such as Orthodoxy and Catholicism are much more open and broadminded towards acceptance of Protestant Christians than the reverse. And I think in this is where we may have disagreed when we are actually in agreement. I've seen  you argue in the past against fundamentalist Protestantism (if I may generalize); it is in fact the exclusivity found in some denominations, such as Seventh Day Adventists and other Protestants towards Catholics that would be a better example of the lament that I have of leaving people 'out' of the fold of Christendom (in their particular tradition.) Rooster's own denomination, if I'm not mistaken, limits salvation to only those who've been baptized in Jesus' name, speak in tongues, and believe in the Oneness of God (rooster correct me if I'm wrong, at least on the official position of Oneness Pentecostalism). The Church of Christ limits salvation only to those who are baptized by immersion with the 'knowledge' that it is the washing away of sins and not a symbol. Other fundamentalists add a list of doctrinal positions that are 'required' to be a 'true' Christian, including belief in eternal torment, the Trinity, the Rapture, speaking in tongues, etc. It is these types of beliefs that I believe are not required to be a Christian leading to salvation, but are additions thereto.

By the same token, there is a tendency, at least from what I've read, to leave those same fundamentalist Christian types out of the fold of Christendom by emerging folks and more liberal Christians. If you're a neo-Con Republican Sarah Palin supporter you can't be a 'real Christian.' On the first point folks are left out of the fold on minutae of doctrine, on the latter because of political beliefs. My own personal view is that it is entirely possible, and likely, that good Christian folks are found in the folds of all these churches and traditions.
3/1/11 1:40 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Lahi
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/01/11 1:45 AM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 7472
Grakman, forgive me if this sounds like nit-picking. Just wanted to mention that while Seventh Day Adventists certainly have some very, very misguided positions about the Roman Catholic Church and very anti-Catholic theology, they officially teach that many Catholics will be saved. I am pretty sure they believe that being Catholic won't be an issue until the very end times for most people. I know there are Adventists who unfortunately believe what you described though. <br /><br />
3/1/11 9:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 22185
Lahi - Grakman, forgive me if this sounds like nit-picking. Just wanted to mention that while Seventh Day Adventists certainly have some very, very misguided positions about the Roman Catholic Church and very anti-Catholic theology, they officially teach that many Catholics will be saved. I am pretty sure they believe that being Catholic won't be an issue until the very end times for most people. I know there are Adventists who unfortunately believe what you described though.


 This is how fundamentalist Baptists tend to view Catholics as well.  They try to figure out if a Catholic accepts Jesus as his personal savior and then see his Catholicism as a kind of unecessary extra or even something that detracts from his personal relationship with Jesus, but doesn't damn him.  I have also heard Catholicism called a "doctrine of demons" by the same people though, so Catholicism proper is not off the hook even if some Catholics are.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.