|
|
Post by twyrch on Feb 17, 2005 18:16:15 GMT -5
I'd love to hear about that. I'll post some more about it if I get time tomorrow... |
|
|
|
Post by Taliesin on Feb 17, 2005 18:21:15 GMT -5
In reply to Crusader.
I think I pretty much agree with you. I do not think though that staying out of Church altogether will help. We are not called to follow, we are called to lead, and to "go and make disciples." The seekers are within the church, and we must seek out the seekers and disciple them.
This I think is a better reason to go to church than any given.
I do think perhaps that there will come a day when church buildings are less important, and small groups are...but for now I go to church.
2. As for witnessing. A friend has said it best. You can't tell a sinner not to sin, they are sinners. This is called total depravity. They have nothing in and of themselves to guide them to true goodness(connectedness to God). Good acts cannot be equated with goodness, cause we can see that sometimes God called his followers to do ungood(worldly speaking) things, like take their son and sacrifice him. Goodness is based upon accordance with God's will. So really, man has nothing inside of him to do good with. That's the Calvinist in me speaking. so when dealing with non-christians, we cannot hold them to any standard that we follow. We can speak when God says to, and love all the time..and pray and disciple. God will bring them to a saving knowledge of Him when He is ready.
That's just my thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by deusXmachina on Feb 17, 2005 18:26:14 GMT -5
I'm a christian. I'm pretty much with Twyrch and Taliesin on it. Nuff said.
|
|
|
|
Post by CynanMachae on Feb 17, 2005 18:28:58 GMT -5
Church is the sanctuary of the Lord. I dont love church politics myself, but church is about worshipping God and His Son. AND fellowshipping with brothers and sisters in Christ. Any excuse to stay away from church is a pretty dumb one, (no offense, guys)
on the seventh day God rested, a symbol of what Heaven will be like. That is what church is. A foretaste of Heaven.
|
|
|
|
Post by CynanMachae on Feb 17, 2005 22:40:07 GMT -5
Sorry about the abrupt ending of my last post, we were at the library and my family was leaving.  Okay, where was I? Yeah, its important to remember that no man is perfect(even Christians) so no one will ever find the "Perfect Church". but that should not discourage us from going. Hebrews 10: 24, 25 "And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some..." |
|
|
|
Post by skyparker on Feb 18, 2005 10:15:01 GMT -5
fantasy fan: a little while back I read an interesting article about that quote of yours, from hebrews weblogs.oxegen.us/lifestream/archive/2004/09/07/4271.aspx there's the link if you or anyone else are interested.. all this emphasis on the church as a place of attendance is a little unsettling... the way I see it, is that church today is a bastardization of the beautiful life the lord presented us with.. it seems more like going back to 'our ways' and staying comfortable in the methods we know work from experience and history, than giving up 'our ways', and falling into the lord's loving embrace.. we are the lord's 'called out ones', his 'ekklesia', and we are his to gather, and his to assemble, we are his to lead.. anyway, I choose to follow the lord now, as bereft of my ways (and our ways) as I can.. .whether it is into a church building, or into a thought, or into a message board.. heh.. or anywhere for that matter.. |
|
|
|
Post by nicked on Feb 18, 2005 10:21:40 GMT -5
i'ma catholic and beieve in god and all, but i don't see why we have to travel to a church to pray. couldn't u just get a blessing an share your home with the lord, thus not having to leave your own home. O and the thing that really bothers me is all the singing (a bit unnecessary)
|
|
|
|
Post by dinadan on Feb 18, 2005 10:34:08 GMT -5
I, for one, like the unncessesary pomp and ritual--while at the same time recognizing it as pomp and ritual. On the other hand, I have a real problem with church squabbling; I'd much rather meet with a group of believers and share experience and talk over coffee or something. To me, that is just as rewarding.
|
|
|
|
Post by twyrch on Feb 18, 2005 11:06:06 GMT -5
i'ma catholic and beieve in god and all, but i don't see why we have to travel to a church to pray. couldn't u just get a blessing an share your home with the lord, thus not having to leave your own home. O and the thing that really bothers me is all the singing (a bit unnecessary) Perhaps singing is unnecesarry, but for many people it helps to put them in a mood of worship. Praising God through music. And if we, His people, fail to praise the Lord, even the very rocks will cry out! (Lu 19:40) |
|
|
|
Post by Riothamus on Feb 18, 2005 12:14:54 GMT -5
Was that religon started by John Calvin, the pre-destination guy Nope. It's Christianity. The term "Calvinist" (as I tried to point out in my post,) refers to theological stance, meaning that I am in theological agreement with John Calvin--hence Calvinist. It isn't a religion, it's a system of theology contained within Christianity, as with Lutheranism and Roman Catholocism. (Sorry I replied so late, but I just had to address this.) |
|
|
|
Post by Taliesin on Feb 18, 2005 14:12:25 GMT -5
Sorry yeah, Riothamus is right. I missed your use of the word religion in there.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgan on Feb 19, 2005 8:41:24 GMT -5
I don't want to belittle anyone's heartfelt beliefs, which you are so honestly pouring out on this thread. However, I have to say that this is an excellent example of what makes Lawhead's approach toward Christianity so refreshing.
Everyone in every generation in every walk of life squabbles about theologies, labels, divisions, etc... Religion is made quite complex, and opinions are held with such ferocity that polarization and division cannot help but occur. But look at Lawhead's characters. Pious Dyfed, wreckless Patrick, devout Arthur - wayward, enlightened, weak, devoted, rebellious, redeemed - the adjectives for his characters goes on and on. Yet who is to say which of these is the greater Christian, much less holds the correct theology?
Lawhead makes the journey of the man's soul the focus. As he says so often, "To whom much is given, much is required." Yet, seemingly in contrast, "More will be given when more is required." The only time I have ever cried reading a book was after spending hours upon hours reading about Arthur's and Merlin's life ambition only to see it die after a few short years - and as Arthur lay on his death bed, he looks at Merlin and says, "It was enough, was it not?" "Arthur my soul, it was enough."
We do not have to achieve God, reach him, or even succeed in our simple endeavors. We must only give all we have to God. Some have more, some have less, but what we have we must give, and when more is required, we will in turn be given more. It is not the beginning or the end, but the journey of the soul to God.
That is not to say all roads lead to God - certainly not. (Our Catholic friend recognizes something most Catholics do not - the church is not our salvation and should steal none of our faith. I hope you also challenge their teaching of the Christ, but that is for another day.) But all souls who believe, trust, and have given what faith they have to God - indeed, all those souls do lead to God and eternal life!
|
|
|
|
Post by dinadan on Feb 19, 2005 9:18:13 GMT -5
I don't want to belittle anyone's heartfelt beliefs, which you are so honestly pouring out on this thread. However, I have to say that this is an excellent example of what makes Lawhead's approach toward Christianity so refreshing. Everyone in every generation in every walk of life squabbles about theologies, labels, divisions, etc... Religion is made quite complex, and opinions are held with such ferocity that polarization and division cannot help but occur. But look at Lawhead's characters. Pious Dyfed, wreckless Patrick, devout Arthur - wayward, enlightened, weak, devoted, rebellious, redeemed - the adjectives for his characters goes on and on. Yet who is to say which of these is the greater Christian, much less holds the correct theology? Lawhead makes the journey of the man's soul the focus. As he says so often, "To whom much is given, much is required." Yet, seemingly in contrast, "More will be given when more is required." The only time I have ever cried reading a book was after spending hours upon hours reading about Arthur's and Merlin's life ambition only to see it die after a few short years - and as Arthur lay on his death bed, he looks at Merlin and says, "It was enough, was it not?" "Arthur my soul, it was enough." We do not have to achieve God, reach him, or even succeed in our simple endeavors. We must only give all we have to God. Some have more, some have less, but what we have we must give, and when more is required, we will in turn be given more. It is not the beginning or the end, but the journey of the soul to God. That is not to say all roads lead to God - certainly not. (Our Catholic friend recognizes something most Catholics do not - the church is not our salvation and should steal none of our faith. I hope you also challenge their teaching of the Christ, but that is for another day.) But all souls who believe, trust, and have given what faith they have to God - indeed, all those souls do lead to God and eternal life! *applause* |
|
|
|
Post by Riothamus on Feb 19, 2005 9:50:48 GMT -5
I don't want to belittle anyone's heartfelt beliefs, which you are so honestly pouring out on this thread. However, I have to say that this is an excellent example of what makes Lawhead's approach toward Christianity so refreshing. Everyone in every generation in every walk of life squabbles about theologies, labels, divisions, etc... Religion is made quite complex, and opinions are held with such ferocity that polarization and division cannot help but occur. But look at Lawhead's characters. Pious Dyfed, wreckless Patrick, devout Arthur - wayward, enlightened, weak, devoted, rebellious, redeemed - the adjectives for his characters goes on and on. Yet who is to say which of these is the greater Christian, much less holds the correct theology? I for the most part agree with you, but I've got to challenge you on this one. Religion is complex, because we are complex, and so God's workings with us are complex. Complexity and simplicity are not incompatable--the Trinity (which I confess not everyone will agree upon,) is an example of this unity in diversity, or simplicity (one essence,) in complexity (three Persons.) And Theology matters because Truth matters. You're correct when you say that many great Christians can hold divergent beliefs and yet be equally Christian. But this doesn't disqualify Theological investigation any more than the fact that there are good Democrats and good Republicans disqualifies party leanings. If truth matters, exactness matters, and so Theology matters. Will some people be divided by Theology? Certianly--as some people are divided by politics. However, neither is to be shunned for that reason. Or as Hoeksema would say, "a covenant-life of friendship with God." Agreed in principle, since the only way to believe, trust, and give one's faith to God is by the Way He has provided. |
|
|
|
Post by Taliesin on Feb 19, 2005 16:39:15 GMT -5
Actually I'm pretty much applauding what He said as well. The Old Testament is chock full of followers of a God that can be described in the same way as some of Lawhead's characters.
Christianity in and of itself is imperfect. Followers of Christ, deeply seeking after his glorification, and the joy that comes with, humbly knowing they are nothing without Him, and lovingly discipling the lost...imperfectly...strengthened only by christ within me...this is the christianity i follow.
"A condition of complete simplicity, costing not less than everything." Christianity as defined by T.S. Eliot. I like that.
|
|
Twyrch /|\
