HelenM

But the teacher is wrong to expect that they can teach things which oppose what they've been asked to teach. And the church is right to call them on it.

Why would the church be different from the world when the world is doing something right? Telling an employee to live up to his employment contract or leave is appropriate in the secular world and also in churches.

Helen

emur

I see where you are coming from. My point is that the church would be saying that the teacher's new view is "wrong", thus giving the teacher a choice: step down or believe as we do and stay. This is telling the teacher what to believe.

This really comes down to churches claiming to know things for certain that they cannot know for certain. Thus the teacher is told to conform or leave based on something that is, dare I say it, gray, and not black and white. This flies in the face of the concept of unity that the church is called to be. It also flies in the face of grace, which isn't about conformity to a rigid set of beliefs but about being accepted as you are.

Don't you find it the least bit strange Helen that conservative churches can remove people from positions or remove them from the church because of a change of belief or practice while still claiming that they are Christian and bound for heaven? It's like "you aren't right enough for us, but you are right enough for God".

No, the church is supposed to be different from "the world". It is working on a completely different level and it's subject is a completely different realm.

Mel

HelenM

You keep saying that they are telling the teacher what to believe - but if they say 'this is what you must teach if you're to be a teacher here' they are telling the teacher what to teach. It's different!

That's too simplistic, imo. There are always conditions on 'accepting people as they are'. It's quite clear that pedophiles would not be 'accepted as they are' around here. Also, not everyone here accepts theists 'as they are'. It's not always best to accept someone 'as they are'. It's not necessarily in a person's best interests to 'accept them as they are' if as they are is not a good way to be - even for them, I mean. Like, if they are struggling with an acute self-destructive habit.

I don't find it at all strange that a church has expectations, makes them clear upfront and then follows through by saying 'if you won't meet these then step down'.

How the church is to be different needs to be carefully defined just as grace meaning 'we accept you as you are' needs carefully defining.

The church being different does not mean that when the world does something well, the church has to not do it the same way - as in the example I've been giving - that the world sets expectations and follows through on them. Explain to me, with Bible verses, why the church must not do that because it has to be different, if you really believe that's what the Bible indicates.

Helen

BadBadBad

What is the basis of Liberal Christianity?

Fear.

Why liberal instead of unquestionably fundy? The basis of liberal christianity is rationality. Fear is the dominator, but rationality shapes the belief as a concession to the rational mind.

Opera Nut

Yeah, these churches split up and toss people out for not conforming to their rules. When the rules are too narrow, then everyone but the male authoritarian leaders (surprise!) get condemned, shunned, excommunicated, etc. That's the problem with groups with too many rules, especially unworkable ones.

The more fundy you get, the more people you have to condemn and throw out.

The only church I know of that accepts everybody, unreservedly, is the Unitarian-universalist church. I've known pagans, tarot card readers, atheists, agnostics, ex-jews, ex-catholics, ex-protestants, you name it, that go to U-U churches and fellowships.


And they never get thrown out for not toeing the line.


And they are most emphatically NOT Christian.

So if someone leaves, it's an individual internal decision, not an external "we are forcing you out cuz you are BAD!" decision.
Unitarians tend to be anti-authoritarian and inner-directed anyway.

Rational BAC

Hi brettc--------

Fear? I have no fear of anything (with the possible exception of red-headed Irishwomen)

I don't think fear has any basis in the belief system of a liberal Christian. It sure does not in mine. What am I supposed to be afraid of? Fundies have "fear". I do not.

You are getting awfully simplistic.

CJD

LOL. That's funny and pathetic at the same time . . .

I should probably expand on this since no one's agreed or disagreed. It's quite simple: both groups accommodate to their surrounding culture. Each can be generalized (unfortunately) as to which side of the cultural spectrum they drift. In other words, they are opposite sides of the same coin.

CJD

emur

The teacher wouldn't be very true to himself if he taught something he didn't believe. If he changes his view from what the church says is right, he has to step down. He in effect is being told "believe the right thing or step down". He is expendable to the church's doctrine. If that is all right with you, fine. It's not all right with me!

Of course there are conditions. But being a pedophile is a far cry from having a different view of baptism or eschatology. The conservative churches narrow down their doctrines and practices much too far.

Again, the expectations where belief and practice are concerned are much too narrow in conservative churches. Each church believes a certain set of doctrines and practices. Each one believes that this is what God wants from them. Yet some of these beliefs and practices contradict (infant baptism vs adult baptism). You see no problem with this? This enhances the Christian message?

How is the church to be different? If one takes the bible as inerrant as conservative churches do, the it should be a unified church (John 17, Ephesians 4). Its leaders must not lord it over other's faith (1 Peter 5). It should NOT narrowly define belief and practice (1 Corinthians - only the incest person was expelled. Those who questioned the resurrection (chapter 15) and abused the Lord's Supper (chapter 11) were not expelled. Paul laid out his case and then left things to God). Even in this Paul addressed them all as saints. Christians are to be first and foremost compassionate toward others (Good Samaritan - replace the Samaritan with a gay person and you will get the drift). Grace is to come before law, and people are to come before doctrine. That is how the church is to be different.

Back to the teacher. Let's say he changes his view of eschatology. He was once a pretribulationist but becomes a posttribulationist. The church is pretrib. It's in their doctrinal statement. Where is the problem? It's not with the teacher. It's with the church and its too narrowly defined doctrine. The church is hardly a model of Paul or Christ as given in the NT.

Don't worry. I'm not holding my breath. Christians are no different than anyone else. The born again thing is an ivory tower phenomenon. People are people. Good, bad, mean, nice, caring, strict... Every group has them. Narrowminded people don't suddenly become gracious when they become Christian. Instead, they generally reframe their narrowmindedness with their Christianity. The person hasn't changed, but has just shifted his/her narrowmindedness. Conservative churches with rules and fine-tuned doctrines are just as human as any other institution with the same.

Mel

emotional

Ah, that's exactly what I found when I was seeking various Orthodox Jewish congregations. I sought a congregation which was a cut above the rest, a congregation of truly pious people without all the pettiness of ordinary humans. I never found any such congregation. All were (to quote Nietzsche) "human, all too human". I left disillusioned.

In the end of things, it is left for the individual to reform himself for the better. Religion's goal of "The New Man" is never achieved.

emotional

Then you have an issue with Christianity as a whole; it was Jesus who allegedly said, "I am the way, the truth and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me" - exclusivism and judgementalism par excellence.

What do you believe Jesus' life was all about? I believe Jesus' life was all about challenging the current rabbinical establishment and getting executed for that. The religion (Christianity) is a later accretion round that life.