its one thing to ask for clarification, its another to demand proof and convincing,,,,

Hmmm?

Well that's interesting. I don't know whether I should claim to be a "Christian" or not.

The Christians themselves have me totally confused on what it means to be a "Christian". Every Christian I meet seems to have a different idea of what that means.

Is Slowhand a "Christian"?

He seems to be cool with the Bible being just hearsay rumors that may or may not contain any actual literal truths.

Is Peter_Pan a "Christian". Based on his posts in other threads he doesn't even know what the Biblical scriptures even say. How can someone claim to be a "Christian" when they don't even know what's in the doctrine?

Some Christians have told me that all you need to do to be a Christian is believe in Jesus. Well, I believe in Jesus. I just don't believe that the hearsay rumors in the New Testament can be trusted to represent what Jesus actually stood for.

Some Christians have told me that all a person needs to do is be a "follower" of Jesus in terms of following his moral guidelines. Well, I find that quite confusing because when I read about the moral views of Jesus they seem to all coincide with my own moral values. How can I "follow" someone who already thinks like me?

Some Christians have told me that as long as I agree with, and follow the same more standards as were taught by Jesus, then I'm a Christian. Well, I guess if Jesus taught the same moral values that I already have then I'm in agreement with following those same moral standards.

So by that definition then I must be a "Christian".

Other Christians tell me that if I don't confess that Jesus is the only begotten sacrificial son of God who died to pay for my sins then I can't claim to be a "Christian".

Well, I certainly can't "confess" to something I neither know to be true, nor have sufficient reason to even believe.

So the whole religion is totally confusing.

I have no frigg'in clue whether I'm a Christian or not. I suppose it all depends on WHO you ask.

I think if you asked Jesus he'd probably say, "Who cares? What does Christianity have to do with anything anyway? Did I not tell you that the Scribes and Pharisees are hypocrites?"

It truly is confusing. And very personal. For example,my personal decision has been to interpret it as walk the walk and the rest is all just talk. Others would say I will be condemned for that. Maybe they're in tighter with God and know something I don't,but I'm comfortable with my position. A lot of energy/lives get wasted trying to decide who is right or wrong-my guess is God would rather see us apply ourselves to something more positive

see for example: http://www.wku.edu/~jan.garrett/panthesm.htm

Pantheism and Western Monotheism
How does pantheism relate to traditional Judaeo-Christian conceptions of God? As Paul Harrison ("Defining the Cosmic Divinity," SP website) points out, traditional (Western) religion describes a God who is ultimately a mystery, beyond human comprehension; awe-inspiring; overwhelmingly powerful; creator of the universe; eternal and infinite; and transcendent. The divine universe fits some of these descriptions without modification and it fits others if we allow ourselves to interpret the terms flexibly.

The divine universe is mysterious. Though we can understand the universe more adequately as scientific research proceeds, there will always be questions to which we will not yet have answers; and explanations of ultimate origins will always remain speculative (they are too far in the past for us to decipher clearly).

The divine universe is awe-inspiring. Would a creator behind it be any more awe-inspiring than the universe itself?

The universe is clearly very powerful. It creates and it destroys on a vast scale.

So far as we know, the universe created all that exists; which is to say that, the universe as it is now was created by the universe as it was a moment ago, and that universe by the universe that existed a moment before that, and so on. If we view universe in this way, we can keep the idea of creator and creation and yet have no need to imagine a being apart from the universe who created it. The divine being is indeed a creator, in the pantheist view. Indeed, the creativity of the natural universe is probably the best evidence for its divinity.

Is the universe eternal? Well, it depends on how you understand eternity. Traditional Western theology understands eternity as a quality of a God that exists altogether outside time. Yet the dynamic and changing universe is very much bound up with time, so it is not eternal in the theological sense. Possibly it is everlasting, maybe it had no first moment and will never cease to exist. Scientific evidence does point to a Big Bang several billion years ago, from which our universe in roughly its current form originated, but if we accept the time-honored precept that nothing comes from nothing, we cannot rule out the existence of a material universe before this Big Bang.

Is the universe transcendent? In Western theology transcendence is a term often paired with eternity. A transcendent being is essentially outside and independent of the universe. Of course, the divinity which pantheists revere is not transcendent in that way. However, in ordinary language, to transcend is to surpass. Well, the universe which includes us also certainly surpasses us, as it surpasses everything we are capable of knowing or observing.
Differences with Western Monotheism

Pantheism has clear differences with the traditional description of God. It departs from the picture of God given in the Old Testament to the extent that the Old Testament attributes human attributes to the divine being, such as a willingness to make deals (You worship me and I'll make you my Chosen People) and anger (for example, Yahweh's anger at the Israelites' worship of the Golden Calf).

Pantheism also avoids some features of the theological conception of God which arises from a mix of Greek philosophical influences and Judaeo-Christian thought. For example, pantheism does not hold that the divinity we revere is a first cause wholly independent of matter, or that the divine being freely creates the physical universe from nothing but its own will.

Do you believe the Bible is historically accurate?

Does your church teach that the Bible is true and historically accurate?

Are all the stories set out and told in the Bible true or are they fiction or a mixture of both?

MsHarmony wrote:

its one thing to ask for clarification, its another to demand proof and convincing,,,,

If you define being a Christian as one who follows the teachings of
Jesus Christ then I don't see any problems with pantheism and
Christianity.

Christ being one with God/Nature is also no problem.

No big deal. Easy.

I think these are all reasonable and appropriate views and definitions.
Plus it makes Abra a Christian and that is the most appealing part.





Even if he is still fuming over his forced baptism.
That water must've been a powerful shock on the wee Abra!

But that's the whole point right there isn't it?

The people that Jeanniebean and myself are demanding proof and convincing evidence from are the people who are attempting to claim that to us that the story is true and that if we refuse to believe it then we are refusing to "obey our heavenly father" the God of the Bible who curses women with painful childbirth as punishment, and so on and so forth.

If you aren't one of those people, then why are you even bothering to argue about it with someone who is demanding evidence from people who DO hold those notions out to be TRUE?

Talk about people getting caught up in the crossfire.

Slowhand has been arguing with Jeanniebean for weeks now only to finally confess to her that it would be ludicrous for anyone to take the bible literally.



Well, gee whiz.

No one would need proof or convincing evidence to take that stance.

I think there is a preconcieved assumption of what others are 'trying' to do when they share their perception, their experience, or their faith

in the story jeannie shared, SHE is the one who initiated a confrontation by asking the question of whether non christians were permitted in

If I truly have invited someone into (wherever) why would they need to further ask about permission to be there except to establish that they perceive themself as being POTENTIALLY unaccepted(in spite of being invited in the first place)


,,,this is my point,,,there are times when people can ask questions seeking an answer, and there are times people ask questions just to build a foundation for the next question or to state a subliminal accusation against the speaker,,

the instructor/teacher usually needs to be able to tell the difference and try to discourage such endless circular interruptions to the lessons they are trying to teach,,,

I accept the Pantheistic Jesus, Slow.

In fact, I don't know if you're aware of this but Jesus is indeed included in my pantheistic spiritual paradigm.

Yep. I have no problem with Jesus.

It's Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, Paul, and others that I have a problem with.

Why don't you just restrict the poll to only Christians who believe
that the bible should be taken literally as true history?

That would not be a fair poll.

This is a poll.


Do you believe the Bible is historically accurate?

Does your church teach that the Bible is true and historically accurate?

Are all the stories set out and told in the Bible true or are they fiction or a mixture of both?

But this is what the thread said. It didn't say Christians only.In fact it didn't say Christians at all.

Slowhand you just hate it because you will find out that you are wrong and that most Christians believe the Bible is historically accurate and true.

So just admit that you are wrong and we can forget the poll. But so far, you are losing.