Christian only: Heretics or Hypocrits or both?

[mikedsjr]

Would you say the greatest problem with Christian leadership today is Heretics all over the place or preaching without living the preaching or a whole lot of both?

Despite the fact that atheist and skeptics want to blame the message by its messengers, I know the message isn't the problem. There is also plenty of preachers living their biblically sound preaching too. I just see that the loudest voices are the ones not doing the walking.

[StillSearching]

Christianity needs MORE heretics and LESS hypocrites, without a doubt. And I'm sorry to disagree with you, but sometimes it is the message.

[ChristLivesWithinMe]

i agree fully. i know a few people (agnostics or people who are not firm with a faith yet) who turn away and look down upon Christianity because they see the people who claim it, not acting or living very good lifestyles. Jesus is not just a get out of sin free card and shouldn't be used as such. this is of course looking at the situation from a christian standpoint. i dunno how people who don't believe in god in the first place look upon hypocrites or if it is a stumbling block to them. could just be used as ammo possibly?

[Atheist37]

i agree fully. i know a few people (agnostics or people who are not firm with a faith yet) who turn away and look down upon Christianity because they see the people who claim it, not acting or living very good lifestyles. Jesus is not just a get out of sin free card and shouldn't be used as such. this is of course looking at the situation from a christian standpoint. i dunno how people who don't believe in god in the first place look upon hypocrites or if it is a stumbling block to them. could just be used as ammo possibly?

I had the good fortune to be raised without any kind of faith or supernatural tradition. From my perspective, I don't see a lot of practical differences in the daily lives of religious and non-religious people. There are liars and cheats who profess deep Christian faith, and plenty of honest and generous non-believers. There are kind and considerate believers, and selfish and cruel atheists. Character and behavior are not strongly influenced by religious belief in my experience.

I suppose if a person knows they are behaving in a very anti-social manner, they might either say "Jesus will forgive me" or "There is no God so nothing matters". It is simply human nature to attempt to justify our actions, and we're very good at it, religious or not.

Sorry for posting in the Christian area, I just wanted to say that for me the only barrier to belief is evidence. I could easily imagine myself a liberal-leaning Christian, from a social point of view. I certainly have fondness for most of the Christians I know. I don't think the occassional hypocrite is much of a barrier to belief for most agnostic/atheists.

[ChristLivesWithinMe]

I had the good fortune to be raised without any kind of faith or supernatural tradition. From my perspective, I don't see a lot of practical differences in the daily lives of religious and non-religious people. There are liars and cheats who profess deep Christian faith, and plenty of honest and generous non-believers. There are kind and considerate believers, and selfish and cruel atheists. Character and behavior are not strongly influenced by religious belief in my experience.

I suppose if a person knows they are behaving in a very anti-social manner, they might either say "Jesus will forgive me" or "There is no God so nothing matters". It is simply human nature to attempt to justify our actions, and we're very good at it, religious or not.

Sorry for posting in the Christian area, I just wanted to say that for me the only barrier to belief is evidence. I could easily imagine myself a liberal-leaning Christian, from a social point of view. I certainly have fondness for most of the Christians I know. I don't think the occassional hypocrite is much of a barrier to belief for most agnostic/atheists.

thanks for the input dude

[spongebob]

I was raised Southern Baptist, accepted Jesus into my heart at the age of 12 and practiced Christianity from that age until I was in my mid-thirties, at which point I began to seriously question my belief in god and Jesus. I witnessed countless Christians who were as loving and kind as Jesus himself. I also witnessed many who were Christians on Sunday, and just as morally ambiguous during the week as anyone else. I knew Christians who stole, cheated on their spouse or taxes, lied, acted with anger and hatred and selfishness, just about every sin you could name. I never allowed these poor examples to influence me, nor did I judge them, nor did their behavior ever cause me to have the least amount of doubt in god. I never saw a connection between bad Christians and belief in god.

But, once I challenged my own belief in god and eventually lost it completely, I began to notice how much the intrepid Christian relied on arguments like "god changes people" as evidence of god. I've always known this to be a poor, at best, argument for the existence of god. People change all the time, sometimes good, sometimes bad, sometimes from good to bad and then back to bad again. But many Christians use it nonetheless. And as long as they do, they will continue to be employing a hypocritical and foolish approach to convincing anyone without faith that there is a god who loves us and wants us to join him in heaven.

Evidence is all that matters and this not reliable evidence, one way or another.

[Rian]

Would you say the greatest problem with Christian leadership today is Heretics all over the place or preaching without living the preaching or a whole lot of both?

Despite the fact that atheist and skeptics want to blame the message by its messengers, I know the message isn't the problem. There is also plenty of preachers living their biblically sound preaching too. I just see that the loudest voices are the ones not doing the walking.

Hey, the Bible says that often the message IS the problem!

And the ones that are quietly doing the walking do not get the press, unfortunately.

[eyeswideopen]

i agree with atheist 37 and spongebob ! and i am not apologising for posting in any area. this is my whole point why are we seperated by belief or not as the case may be?
as spongebob said there are good and bad people, take for instance suicide bombers (very religious not very nice people) i rest my case yer honour!!
i believe in me and i think after raising 2 kids well that i am a moraly good person. so do i need to conform to a religion to be "saved" and saved from what? if my belief is wrong that after we die we are dead and there is nothing then surely any "afterlife" is like a bonus level on pacman either way i win

[mikedsjr]

What is the point of the Christian Only Section, Emery? I don't care if any atheist has a good point. This running amok of the Christian area by atheist has got to stop.

[mikedsjr]

The message can be the problem. The only way it could be a problem is that we don't like things like

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

or

All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.

The only way I can see the message is the problem is that we don't like that we aren't really good people before God. We can be really good to each other, but God made us to glorify him and we don't admit we constantly fail at that.

The other problem i was refering to is the real message has turned into a heresy by making it into something of a good luck charm, or a way to get rich or that we choose God and He is just hoping that we do that then God jumps up for joy that we would even think of Him. We make the gospel message into something the gospel isn't. That's when it isn't the message but heresy.

EWO, I didn't write this as a response to your claims of goodness. This has weighed heavy on me lately. I'm grieved at the distortion of the gospel, including any ways I've allowed myself to distort it.

[Pseudonym]

Christianity needs MORE heretics and LESS hypocrites, without a doubt. And I'm sorry to disagree with you, but sometimes it is the message.

Something interesting on that topic. It's an intriguing idea that if you agree that Christian orthodoxy is a constant work in progress, then heresy is a key part of the process of understanding. Without heresy, there would be no progress.

[StillSearching]

Christianity needs MORE heretics and LESS hypocrites, without a doubt. And I'm sorry to disagree with you, but sometimes it is the message.

Something interesting on that topic. It's an intriguing idea that if you agree that Christian orthodoxy is a constant work in progress, then heresy is a key part of the process of understanding. Without heresy, there would be no progress.

Precisely my point, though I'm not sure how you can say that orthodoxy is a work in progress. Isn't that an orthodoxymoron?

[mikedsjr]

Orthodoxy isn't a work in progress. What is a work in progress is heresy spinning itself into the new ideas of the day. The Trinity isn't a work in progress. The Lord's supper isn't a work in progress. Christ death and resurrection isn't a work in progress. God isn't a work in progress. What is a work in progress is exposing the latest innovations of the heretics.

[Pseudonym]

The Trinity isn't a work in progress.

There's a major debate going on within Evangelicalism at the moment on the nature of the Trinity, essentially identical to one of the creed-era debates, over an idea called "subordinationalism".

The Lord's supper isn't a work in progress.

It's not like it hasn't changed over the years. In 1 Corinthians, you get the picture that it was a full-on meal at the time.

Christ death and resurrection isn't a work in progress.

A lot of the great theologians of history disagree in part, including Paul. The eschatological aspect, and the participatory aspect, are indeed ongoing.

God isn't a work in progress.

That's something on which the great theologians of history differ, too. At the very least, you must have noticed a difference between the Old and New Testament portrayals of God. Something changed.

[mikedsjr]

1. I don't know what group is debating subordinationism. That's a real shame. You aren't going to get that from Catholicism or Reformed. That is certainly heresy in my book.
2. I understand that the whole presentation of the Lord's supper could be different.
3.
4. Although I'm not a scholar and won't profess to be able to answer your statement properly, I don't believe there is a difference in the God of the OT and the NT. What you have in the OT is a great amount of history of God with the Jews. And I certainly don't see much of a difference between them and Christians after Christ. The main difference is that Christianity isn't a nation and the Jews were, but also were supposed to be a light for the nations and they failed at that job. Christianity is nearly a part of every nation today. In some form or another Christians and are making a difference around the world for God. And Christianity, much like the nation Israel, has a tremendous amount of opinions that were eating at it, when God was to be there so support and reliance. There are those who truly follow God. And then there are those who claim to be Christian and are lousy pathetic demonstration of who God is. And in that respect, there isn't a whole lot of difference between them and the Jews who were given over to the reprobates nations around them.

Romans 1 is a sour subject to many who truly despise God. And Romans 1 is a source of great love to those who truly love Him. God is unchanging. And the fact that any so-called Christian would even dare play with those thoughts in a heretic.