Testing The Christian Apologists

You are too authoritarian and stubborn. You often exemplify the essence of your fleshly nature and are currently not being a good advertisement for Christianity. Give a damn about that!

Okay, so it comes down to behavior. Is there anything wrong with dancing like a heathen? Doesn't the Bible say that was exactly the type person Jesus would hang out with? What possible transformation would even be needed?

Im just going by the words of Paul. Much of Biblical Christian Theology emphasizes the need of a transformation. I know you never took much stock in the "Born Again" Theology, but I think I can find quite a bit of scriptural support for allowing God to change you. Behavior itself is indicative of a willful change. Not everyone starts out exactly overjoyed at the prospect of taking time out of one's week to volunteer to feed and clothe the homeless. That itself involves a change of attitude.

And I agree with your interpretation of what Christianity is about...up to a point. Just because Jesus hung out with partiers in no way shows that He would have accepted them joyfully into His Father's kingdom as is. A different standard of behavior is expected of adopted children. One must follow Dads rules.

Phat writes: One must follow Dads rules.

Not when Dad's rules are wrong.

No Phat, if there is a judgement it will be behavior that is judged.

Phat writes: Much of Biblical Christian Theology emphasizes the need of a transformation.

And transformation can only be discerned by the outward behavior of the person. By their fruits they will be known.

But the change involves how others are treated and not whether a behavior is seen as appropriate or inappropriate.

Phat writes: Just because Jesus hung out with partiers in no way shows that He would have accepted them joyfully into His Father's kingdom as is.

Yet nowhere in the Bible stories does Jesus tell them to change their behavior. The closest might be the really meaningless "go and sin no more" and even there there is no condemnation of behavior. In fact more often Jesus does condemn the behavior of those who try to punish those who seem to be guilty.

jar writes: No Phat, if there is a judgement it will be behavior that is judged.

It may be splitting hairs but I don't agree with that. I'd say that our behaviour is the symptom of what is actually judged. I believe that judgement is about the heart, or the motivation for our behaviour. I think that there is a huge difference, (even though the behaviour is still the same), between the person who donates a sum of money to a cause and gets public recognition as the person who gives the same sum anonymously. The behaviour looks the same but the motivation can be very different.

The same is true of someone of little means who donates a sum to a cause as compared to someone who is wealthy that donates an even greater sum.

I think that from a philosophical POV CS Lewis does a great job of making that issue clear in both "The Great Divorce" and "The Last Battle".

I agree with you, GDR. I see a basic split between liberal Christianity and Conservative Christianity. The liberals seem to think that a loving God would never seek to change anyone and would in fact accept all shapes, colors, and spirits(independent spirits) into His house whereas the conservatives are quite sure that God has an absolute standard, plan, method, model, and procedure for his grand plan.

GDR writes: I believe that judgement is about the heart, or the motivation for our behaviour.

The road to Hell is paved with motivation.

Phat writes: I see a basic split between liberal Christianity and Conservative Christianity.

It's a continuum. And you're backsliding into conservatism.

ringo writes: The road to Hell is paved with motivation.

Sure if your motivation is self serving even at the expense of others.

GDR writes: ringo writes: The road to Hell is paved with motivation. Sure if your motivation is self serving even at the expense of others.

Well, the aphorism doesn't add a lot of qualifications to nullify its meaning.

phat writes: Just because Jesus hung out with partiers in no way shows that He would have accepted them joyfully into His Father's kingdom as is.

To which jar responds;

Yet nowhere in the Bible stories does Jesus tell them to change their behavior. The closest might be the really meaningless "go and sin no more" and even there there is no condemnation of behavior. In fact, more often Jesus does condemn the behavior of those who try to punish those who seem to be guilty.

Which lends support to the idea that not everyone is saved or ends up in Heaven.
Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for claiming to know God and yet acting contrarily.

He would not do the same to the common street people because they had no clue who God was. Thus they shouldn't be judged. Now a case can be made that by Jesus seeking to know them, it implies that God would, in fact, accept them. My point is that once you know God, you will willingly change. You don't enter heaven smoking cigarettes, doing recreational drugs, perusing Penthouse, and/or polishing your 57 chevy and other household idols. You enter humbly aware of who God is and grateful that He accepts you.

Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.

Well, He might let you liberals in just to test (and piss off) some of the conservatives, but I promise you He won't let Satan and the demons chill in there. He kicked them all out once, during the War in Heaven.

Phat writes: You don't enter heaven smoking cigarettes, doing recreational drugs, perusing Penthouse, and/or polishing your 57 chevy and other household idols.

Again, that is the fantasy creation of the CCoI but not found anywhere in the Bible.

Phat writes: Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for claiming to know God and yet acting contrarily.

Lord Lord !

Phat writes: You don't enter heaven smoking cigarettes, doing recreational drugs, perusing Penthouse, and/or polishing your 57 chevy and other household idols.

jar writes: Again, that is the fantasy creation of the CCoI but not found anywhere in the Bible.

So what? You limit God and Jesus to characters in a book. You read the book without any allowance for God to become real to you---basically treating God as you treated Santa Claus. You then attack the majority of Christianity and Christian thought and belief, labeling them as charlatans, hucksters, and weavers of fantasy. The reason that you likely do this is that you were influenced by your largely secular-minded professors at your boarding school, for starters. Your entire club is a bunch of freethinkers who respect logic, reason, and "reality" as they see it anyway, and who taught you never to fall for the idea of belief and trust in the God outside of the book.

Phat writes: So what? You limit God and Jesus to characters in a book. You read the book without any allowance for God to become real to you---basically treating God as you treated Santa Claus. You then attack the majority of Christianity and Christian thought and belief, labeling them as charlatans, hucksters, and weavers of fantasy.

No Phat, I simply point out that they consistently misrepresent what is actually written in the Bible to create the fantasy they want.

Phat writes: The reason that you likely do this is that you were influenced by your largely secular-minded professors at your boarding school, for starters. Your entire club is a bunch of freethinkers who respect logic, reason, and "reality" as they see it anyway, and who taught you never to fall for the idea of belief and trust in the God outside of the book.

No Phat, I do this because I actually respect the Bible and do not try to create either the fantasy I want or the God I desire.

It is the Apologists who create the fantasies and misrepresent what is actually written in the Bible.

That is the "So what"?

Edited by jar, : applin spallin