Liberal churches. Christian or not?

OnceConvinced · Post by **OnceConvinced** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:13 am

I am writing this thread with my God glasses on.

In another thread Drs said:

It would be better for the churches to judge and keep order and have all who are offended walk out bitter and angry because they have no place with CHRIST if they refuse Him and deny His word.

This came up on a discussion about judging. Drs maintains that members must be judged. Now I'm not saying I entirely disagree with his opinions on that, but I do disagree with the way he suggests going about it.

I have seen way too many people walk out of churches due to being judged. This only serves to push people away from Christ. And I have certainly seen it here on this site, some Chirstians judging others, spreading illwill and turning people off Christianity rather than attracting them to it.

I have been guilty in the past of judging a person of another religion and as a result this person refused to talk to me ever again. I thus messed up my chances of ever being able to convert this person. If perhaps I had been more sensitive to him, it may have been a different story.

Scare church members away and they may not get the teaching they need to get them back on the right track. You may be condemning them to hell yourself. I don't think it shows love, mercy, patience, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, Christian grace or any of the good things Jesus showed to the people everybody disliked.

Drs would condemn liberal churches as not teaching true Christianity. He would rather see people leave the church offended, than to change his methods and deal with people in a more sensitive manner.

So are liberal churches right in being little more tolerant of people?
Or should all churches take a dogmatic approach and judge it's members, thus risking detering them from attending?
What are the ramifications?
What are the advantages?

scottlittlefield17 · Post by **scottlittlefield17** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 4:30 pm

If someone is in the sins that God says are going to hell such in Revelation chapter 21 I believe it is then they are not going to heaven. Now if not, would you really want to stand before God and say "I did not think you really mean't I could kill. I thought as long as the President said they were the enemy. you wouldn't mind" or "I didn't think Jesus meant he was the ONLY way. I thought maybe some others could squeeze in". Do you want to say that before God?

OnceConvinced · Post by **OnceConvinced** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 9:40 pm

scottlittlefield17 wrote:If someone is in the sins that God says are going to hell such in Revelation chapter 21 I believe it is then they are not going to heaven. Now if not, would you really want to stand before God and say "I did not think you really mean't I could kill. I thought as long as the President said they were the enemy. you wouldn't mind" or "I didn't think Jesus meant he was the ONLY way. I thought maybe some others could squeeze in". Do you want to say that before God?

Just how much judging should be allowed when the bible says don't judge? I see no advantages in condeming people left right and centre if all it's going to do is make them leave the church. Better to keep them where you can preach to them in a non judgmental manner and have them realise the errors of their way based on the stirring of the "holy spirit". After all, that's one of the jobs of the Holy Spirt right? Let it do its job. I always believed that condemnation was from the devil and the conviction was from God. I see the liberal churches relying on conviction, while the militant ones rely on condemnation. Which is better?

scottlittlefield17 · Post by **scottlittlefield17** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:20 pm

The bible says we are to judge those inside the church. The church as Ephesus in Revelation was commended for there ability to root our false teaching.

OnceConvinced · Post by **OnceConvinced** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:32 pm

So no discernment should be used? We should just condemn every church member who does something we dont' like? I've seen that sort of thing in churches before. Those who were condemned left the church and drifted away from the faith. What was achieved by that method? All it did was turn people off.

scottlittlefield17 · Post by **scottlittlefield17** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:26 pm

So no discernment should be used? We should just condemn every church member who does something we dont' like? I've seen that sort of thing in churches before. Those who were condemned left the church and drifted away from the faith. What was achieved by that method? All it did was turn people off.

Absolutely not, The Bible is the discernment that should be used when Christians are involved. The Bible has clear guidelines for what it expects and does not expect. There are lists in Romans and Revelation for example of those who are in certain sins are not going to heaven. If you are a Christian then that should be important to you. I know that you are not but you are debating as one at this point.

Scotracer · Post by **Scotracer** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:29 pm

scottlittlefield17 wrote:
So no discernment should be used? We should just condemn every church member who does something we dont' like? I've seen that sort of thing in churches before. Those who were condemned left the church and drifted away from the faith. What was achieved by that method? All it did was turn people off.
Absolutely not, The Bible is the discernment that should be used when Christians are involved. The Bible has clear guidelines for what it expects and does not expect. There are lists in Romans and Revelation for example of those who are in certain sins are not going to heaven. If you are a Christian then that should be important to you. I know that you are not but you are debating as one at this point.

It obviously isn't that clear since there have been a grand total of 34,000 Christian denominations over the years...and that number is rising. Something must be at least a bit ambiguous.

scottlittlefield17 · Post by **scottlittlefield17** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:32 pm

You have a point there. There are things that are ambiguous to an extent. However the things that keep you out of heaven are clear. Some however do not want to obey them, so they come up with theorys of why what was said was not meant.

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Tue Aug 18, 2009 1:14 am

Scotracer wrote:
scottlittlefield17 wrote:
So no discernment should be used? We should just condemn every church member who does something we dont' like? I've seen that sort of thing in churches before. Those who were condemned left the church and drifted away from the faith. What was achieved by that method? All it did was turn people off.
Absolutely not, The Bible is the discernment that should be used when Christians are involved. The Bible has clear guidelines for what it expects and does not expect. There are lists in Romans and Revelation for example of those who are in certain sins are not going to heaven. If you are a Christian then that should be important to you. I know that you are not but you are debating as one at this point.
It obviously isn't that clear since there have been a grand total of 34,000 Christian denominations over the years...and that number is rising. Something must be at least a bit ambiguous.

Not to mention the tens of thousands of heretics the orthodox killed for believing what they believed differently. Would all those heretic men, woman and children die for a lie?
Discernment and tolerence don't seem to be their strong points.

OnceConvinced · Post by **OnceConvinced** » Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:32 pm

scottlittlefield17 wrote:
Absolutely not, The Bible is the discernment that should be used when Christians are involved. The Bible has clear guidelines for what it expects and does not expect. There are lists in Romans and Revelation for example of those who are in certain sins are not going to heaven. If you are a Christian then that should be important to you. I know that you are not but you are debating as one at this point.

But then you can get into a big debate on what the bible is actually saying and to what extents we should go. Liberal churches believe they are following what the bible says. Militant churches also believe they are following what the bible says. Who dictates who is correct?

You have a point there. There are things that are ambiguous to an extent. However the things that keep you out of heaven are clear. Some however do not want to obey them, so they come up with theorys of why what was said was not meant.

Even those things are not obvious. We have huge debates running here, even between Christians about what gets you into Heaven or Hell. All the different denominations have different ideas about that. ie some believe you must be chosen first, other's believe everyone can be saved. Some believe works and faith go hand in hand, while others believe that all it takes is faith. There are so many different perspectives and for someone to say their's is the only right interpretation of scripture is arrogant.

Megaboomer · Post by **Megaboomer** » Thu Oct 29, 2009 1:44 pm

---well i think if you look at Jesus and see who he selected to give his teachings to (the disciples) you can see that scripture can be taken literally unless it is specifically labeled as symbolism. that's why the diciple being untrained in doctrine where able to confound the jewish leaders.
---(acts 4:13)Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men, they marveled. And they realized that they had been with Jesus.
--- if you compare the manuscripts of the bible it's easy to see that the only thing that changed about Christianity was the doctrine of the Church's that had differences.
----and so there are Manny different churches but the meaning coming from scripture has been held true.
--- a good example was when after the printing press was invented, and more people where able to have a copy of the Latin Vulgate a guy named martin Luther presented 95 thesis to the catholic church because they had gone so far from what scripture taught that they where saying that a priest could send your loved one up to heaven if you gave a coin in an offering.
----luckily martin Luther translated the bible into German so that all the people in Germany could read it before he was killed.
--- God doesn't change and if the early church's doctrine is in the bible i think we should follow to it as much as possible according to scripture.
--- sinners should be able to find refuge in the church for healing but people who have accepted Christ should strive to sin no more and become more like Jesus through the power of the Holy spirit.
---(Romans 6:6)knowing this, that our old man was crucified with [Him], that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.
---(Romans 6:1-2)What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?
---that goes for any church that tolerates homosexuality also
(1 Corinthians 6:9) Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
---I think that a church should promote what God has to say on the matter A.K.A. the bible.
--- allot of churches believe in many different things but the bible is very clear on most issues