... well seeing as I'm not Christian... the thread title is not true... but if I WERE to be a Christian, I would join this church. Here is a statement that all churches (temples, etc.) should adopt:
In the United Methodist Church, "Reconciling Congregations" are those who have made a point of stating that we welcome gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons into the full life of our church community - in spite of the mixed messages that some of our denomination's policies send. For many churches - ours included - the process of being "reconciling" expands to express our hope of encompassing multiple kinds of diversity.
This is the "Reconciling Statement" adopted by this congregation:
"We believe that each individual is of sacred worth. Therefore, we pledge ourselves to engage in the sacred hospitality and responsibility Christ [God, Allah, Krishna, etc.] taught. We commit ourselves to maintaining a place of safety and sanctuary for all who come together in ministry and mission: people of all races, cultures, ages, sexual orientations, family structures, economic situations, and mental or physical conditions. Through the grace of Christ [God, Allah, Krishna, etc.] we dedicate ourselves to live out these commitments creatively, humbly and with hope."
I agree. And this sums up the problem the this so-called Methodist spin-off:
"Through the grace of Christ [God, Allah, Krishna, etc.]"
It says it all. Another example of PC gone berserk. Next, a committee member will point out "We left out Wickens and also those guys that kill chickens in Haiti." The list of equivalents to Christ will grow to hundreds since once you play the "all cultures and religions are equivalent" game you end up in a place you did not first anticipate.
Everyone is welcome to attend meetings in my church.
Not everyone can be a member of my church while living in certain sinful ways.
That sounds reasonable, so long as you can somehow rationalize it to Christian theology (flawed as it is, IMO.)
A church is a collection of "believers" or like-minded people so it is natural that they would not want to associate with non-believers.
It is when churches discriminate on a non-theological basis that I take some exception (but not a whole lot... since a church IS a private club.)
I well remember many, many (often Baptist) conservative churches that would not let black people in the door, much less as members. I can only assume those Christians believed that blacks worshiped a lesser Jesus than whites.
I knew a young black guy (a few years older than me) who, on one Sunday, walked into a white-only Baptist church in southeast Virginia (Danville, I think) and sat down. He said a lot of heads turned but no one said a word. Walking home, a car drove up, some white high school kids got out and started fighting with him. Fortunately a police car came along and broke it up. (In South Carolina the police would have joined the fight!) No one was hurt (or arrested.)
The next week he got a lot smarter and went to the same church, but this time with ten guys who looked like the offensive front line of the Bears.
Not long afterward the deacons and the pastor... who were good people but afraid of speaking out for fear of retaliation from segments of their congregation finally did speak out and announced that their doors (and membership roles) would be open to all who believed in the teaching of Jesus Christ.
He told me that no one in the black community joined that church, but it helped usher in a wave of change from the old segregationist mindset (of both the white and black communities) toward a "better future for all of us in our city" approach.
You youngsters in the venue have NO IDEA how much courage it took for the black kid to walk into that church... OR for the church elders and clergy to stand up for the right thing... which they did (albeit about a hundred years too late for me!)
Taken in total, American christian churches (except for abortion rights) historically have been on the forefront of social "progressive" change in this country and most can stand tall and say "We were part of the solution, not the problem." I've always favored faith-based or community based (i.e. ACORN) funding in helping the poor and thought the Bush administration was correct in that approach.
However, the "new christian" movement with its message of exclusion, biblical fundamentalism, and born-again zealotry is a movement that I fear is a force hoping to bring us back to Alabama of 1958. That time, like now, was a time of entitlement. Today only the rich are entitled to safe housing, secure neighborhoods, good healthcare, and superior education. Back in my day it was white Christians.
Fortunately, this movement is small in comparison. Unfortunately, it is growing via hate-mongers like Palin, Beck, and to some extent Huckabilly.
It's funny. All of you neo-cons are arming yourselves because you fear some kind of anarchy or some kind of military dictatorship. I'm arming myself because I fear... YOU!
I think it very possible that a Beck or Limbaugh or Palin or Huckabilly could organize a national pogrom or orchestrate some kind of "Let's blame the [jews, blacks, immigrants, gays]" mass-hysteria where we go back to the days of night-riders, lynchings, bombings, and all of the other "pleasantries" of Alabama of 1958.
And do I think a President Palin or Huckabilly could create a theocracy if they controlled the reins of power... where all non-believers are sent to "re-education" camps? Absolutely.
I saw you folks at the town-hall meetings, and you are one angry bunch of people... capable of just about every atrocity I could ever imagine... or any holocaust that ever happened in the past.
Do I think any of this will happen? No. Of course that's what my ancestors said in Germany in 1934. And that's why we say today, "Never Again."
Any church is free to adopt whatever policies they want. Hell, even the Scientologists have their own schtick (they think they came from the planet Theton -and have the nerve to say psychiatrists are all crazy).
However, if a church is going to claim it is Christian I would hope it at least gives some credence to the book that it claims is the foundation for their religion.
Some "Christian" churches are more like the "Church of What's Happen' Now" and have gone to and past the point of absurdity. They want to ignore parts of the Bible they find inconvenient and "subject to interpretation."
Quite a bit like some who find the Constitution inconvenient, flawed, and subject to interpretation.
It's always interesting to watch people who don't want to have anything to do with religion, tell religous people what they think their religion should be and what they should believe.
Of course the problem is as old as the country, which is why the first amendment to the Constitution says that the Federal government can't make any rules that infringe on people and their practice of religion. Apparently the founding fathers were well acquainted with the problem.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Question for DHK: Is it really possible for God to separate the sin from the sinner, love one and hate the other?
Think carefully about your answer - it's a trick question.
Last edited by Robert Barney : 09-25-2009 at 12:13 AM.
Reason: Posts merged
That is a judgment call made by the Almighty and not by me.
It also depends on the status of your soul at the time of judgment.
We are all sinners in the sight of God. But as a Christian I believe that if we follow Christ and have our sins cleansed by His blood we can be saved and brought back into the presence of the Father.
However, if we have not accepted Christ and chosen to follow Him, we may not be saved because we will be judged IN sin without having a way to cleanse our souls.
God loves ALL His children. But he cannot dwell with any unclean thing. Nor could we (in a sinful state) be in the presence of the Father in all His glory. He will prepare a place for us. That place may be a heaven or a hell, depending on the choices we've made and the direction we've chosen for our lives.
It is for US to hate the sin and love our neighbor. It is for God to have His judgment upon our actions and love us and chastise us as well.
"Is it really possible for God to separate the sin from the sinner, love one and hate the other?"
DHK wrote:
"That is a judgment call made by the Almighty and not by me."
If it is a judgement call, and I don't think it is, the Bible is already clear about God's position on sin. He cannot tolerate it. I like to think of it as an intense adverse allergic reaction.
Adam was warned in the garden that on the day he committed sin, he would die. Do you think God's position would have been clearer if God had said on the day he committed sin he would be tortured?
The Bible teaches that there is ONLY one way to separate sin from the sinner, and that is through a blood sacrifice. Whether you are Jew or Christian, that is what the book teaches.
Hebrews 9:22 (New International Version)
In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
For Christians we believe that it is the blood shed by Jesus on the cross that saves us from sin. The Bible says:
2 Corinthians 5:21 (New International Version)
21God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
So when Jesus went to the cross, having never sinned, the sin that was put on Him was our sin. And so when Jesus died, He was being punished for what we had done, not what He did.
That is the ONLY way that sin can be separated from the sinner. If there was an easier way for God to separate sin from man, don't you think God would have opted for that versus sending His only begotten Son to die a horrible death on a Roman cross? There was no other way, just the one way.
If our sin has NOT been separated from us by the blood of Jesus, then we are sin.
Read again what Paul said to the Corinthians. Jesus was made sin for us. That's why God punished Jesus, he became sin because of our sin. And if our sin had not been put on Him, then in the same way we are sin. God hates sin which means God hates the sinner. He take no pleasure in punishing the sinner, but God cannot tolerate sin.
While that may sound awful, the remedy is quite simple. Here is what Jesus Himself said:
John 10:9 (New International Version)
I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.
So if you are worried about being a sinner, I strongly recommend hooking up with Jesus. I did, and I don't regret it.
NOTE TO RICK: Please ignore the above. It is just the rambling deluded conversation of two delusional religous guys.
I also like to play hold'em poker, which is also delusional. Funny thing though, the First Amendment protects my right to talk about religion, but is silent on the subject of poker. Did you ever wonder why?
"Is it really possible for God to separate the sin from the sinner, love one and hate the other?"
R.B.
He is called Almighty for a reason.
To suggest that God cannot do something is insulting to the Spirit of Grace.
Read 2Cor5 a little closer. You'll see that God has already reconciled man unto Himself through Christ.
2Cor5 does not say that God will reconcile man to Himself when man prays a certain prayer. It says that God reconciled man unto Himself through Christ. PAST tense.
Last edited by GonnaFlyNow : 09-25-2009 at 06:16 PM.
QUOTE- "A church is a collection of "believers" or like-minded people so it is natural that they would not want to associate with non-believers."
If the church does not want to associate with non-believers it is not a church at all. It is impossible for a Christian to be a Christian if he, or she, has the opinion that he, or she, is better than anyone else.
Christian- Follower of Christ
Christ did shy away from people who were different from him;we shouldn't either. He and Matthew ate with a huge crowd of tax collectors. Churches should be full of gay's, prostitutes, thieves, biggots, drunks,etc. The church is a hospital for sinners, not a rest home for saints. This doesn't men that we should water down the message about sin. I am a divorcee and I feel that divorce is a sin, and just because I am in the church doesn't mean the pastor shouldn't talk about divorce being sinful. But for one to enter heaven you must tutn from your sin and follow Christ.
Jesus told the disciples if people didn't welcome them into their home, they were to shake the dust off of their sandals and continue their journey. Same thing applies to this forum; Why do these guys bring up this subject, because they are looking for an argument, not an answer. There are people on this Earth that will never be saved. We can tell them the message, if they choose to except it great, but if they don't move on to someone who might.The Pharisees never excepted it, and Jesus spoke to those that would. Al and other guys fit into this category. I hope one day that will be different, but arguing with them only fuels there fire. One day they will find out if it is true or not, and it may be too late.
Is it possible to love the sinner and hate the sin. OF COURSE IT IS!!!! Did Jesus hate the Samaritan woman at the well? NO, he loved her enough to tell her of her sins and that she needed to turn from them. Jesus was perfect, he didn't hate anyone, but he did hate some of the stupid things they did.
This will be my last comment on Christianity on the forum because it's only argumentitive here, nothing more, nothing less,
R.B.
He is called Almighty for a reason.
To suggest that God cannot do something is insulting to the Spirit of Grace.
Read 2Cor5 a little closer. You'll see that God has already reconciled man unto Himself through Christ.
2Cor5 does not say that God will reconcile man to Himself when man prays a certain prayer. It says that God reconciled man unto Himself through Christ. PAST tense.
So you would say that God can sin? I would tell you that I believe that God CANNOT sin.
You say that "God has already reconciled man unto Himself through Christ." Do you beleive that ALL men are reconciled to God and that ALL men are saved?
Jesus didn't call people sinners but the Pharisees did. Jesus called people "lost sheep". He came to seek and save the lost. You don't have to be bad to need Him just lost. Lost describes a lot of people today including many on this forum. When Jesus kicked off his earthly ministry he began in His home town of Nazareth. You would think that the opening words He spoke in His campaign would be very very important. Here is what He said:
Whether we believe it or not, whether we believe in Him or not, that is what He says he came to do for us. As T.L. Osborn says "he came to fix us up beautiful". I think that is good news.
Didn't God kill everyone in that Noah's Ark story?
KEEP WRITING THE POST. I HAVE DECIDED TO USE THIS CONVERSATION TO TEACH MY SUNDAY SCHOOL CLASS ON SUNDAY.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Originally Posted by healthagent
Didn't God kill everyone in that Noah's Ark story?
Yes he did. It appears to me that you are treading on dangerous ground since you have such a vital role in the education of agents, including Christian agents. Of course it is you right to do so if you choose.
Last edited by VaDwayne : 09-25-2009 at 10:37 PM.
Reason: Posts merged
My Church is Better Than Your Church
May god have mercy on your soul (which doesn't exist either).
Linear Mode
