Implications of Heresy

[achilles12604]

I have finally found a title which I think describes my religious views. I have created a usergroup to match. I accept many of the tenants of Christianity. I accept many of the core values and teachings. In fact let me just list them out.

I accept God exists.
I accept Jesus was his son and unique among men.
I accept that Jesus death atoned for sin.
I accept that Jesus performed miracles.
I accept that God inspired many of the writers of the bible.

Now begins my Heresy.

I accept that God inspired other great men of different faiths like Gandhi

I accept that salvation is a matter of the heart and faith is a byproduct or a symptom of the condition of this heart.

I accept that much of the bible can not be read literally

I accept that some of the stories of the bible are nothing more than stories, nor were they ever meant to be more than this.

I accept that people of other faiths have the potential for salvation just as any Christian would

I accept that the church has fallen far from where it originated.

I accept that the writings of Paul and the other disciples, while lead by God, are still personal interpretations and therefore subject to personal bias.

I do not accept the church taught concept of original sin.

I do not accept the sinlessness of Mary

I do not accept the concept of sainthoods

I do not accept that hell is a place for eternal torture in some fire lake

I accept (basically) some form of evolution/ID

I do not accept a young earth creation model.

I accept much of the current church as hypocritical and lazy

I accept that God reaches out to all men where ever they are through whatever beliefs they hold.

I accept that God knows just about everything, but can not know individual futures nor do I think this idea is supported well by scripture.









Now, I leave this WIDE open. I certainly will not take offense to anything written here. I want brutally honest opinions.

Who does not believe that my current beliefs allow for my own salvation (I am hell bound)?

Who believes that any of my current beliefs contradict another of my current beliefs?

Who here would not consider me a "true Christian"?

Which of my beliefs are directly contradicted by scripture?

What would Jesus say of my beliefs? What would you imagine him telling me?





Honesty people. Brutal, ugly, in my face, even to the point of suspending rule #1 for a moment, HONESTY

[achilles12604]

[achilles12604]

I would recommend reading the Book of John if you have a Bible.

I have noticed your frequent use of John. I wonder if you have noticed my non-existence use of this book.

May I ask why you like John or prefer it over the other books?

[Goose]

I can see this could become a very long thread even if it is just the two of us. I hope it is very enlightening.

Yes, it will be fun and informative. Lot's in your post and you're right, it could get lengthy, so I'll try to stick to the issues. Give me a day or two to go through your post.

[servant]

The Book of John is a very loving book and Jesus also makes some strong claims regarding Himself. I like the first Chapter and the first verse the most:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I would like to note that although I note from the Book of John 3 times in my previous post I hold all scripture on the same plain as being God's Holy Word.

You posted up your long response to Goose right before I posted and I did not get a chance to look it over. You make some interesting points. One thing that you mentioned is

I have recently been forced (through scripture) to give up the idea that god knows absolutely everything, meaning he is unable to know individual's futures. Did I include this in my heresy? If not I should go add it.

This is called "Open View Theism". People that hold to this view believe God can know the future He just choses not to. This allows Him to give people Free Will. While it sounds good I personally do not hold to this view. But I believe in no way that thinking that God does or does not know the future has anything to do with a persons salvation.

[Goose]

[achilles12604]

1. The issue of belief in the resurrection. Is it necessary for salvation?
2. The methodology for rejecting some scripture, such as Paul, but accepting others. So far it seems to be, the Gospels trump everything else because they are the teachings of Christ. Is that pretty close?
3. The deity of Christ. Was Jesus divine? Or was he a sinless man that had a unique connection/relationship to God. Or both? Or something else.

Alright, you seem to have boiled it down.

1. The issue of belief in the resurrection. Is it necessary for salvation?

I do not think that belief in the resurrection is criteria for salvation. Jesus preaches on the subject of salvation a lot. He also preached on his death and resurrection a lot. I don't know of any place where he talked about both at the same time in any capacity.


Therefore, I think belief in a physical resurrection is not required for salvation. Question, where does it imply in any of scripture that it is in fact a requirement for salvation?

2. The methodology for rejecting some scripture, such as Paul, but accepting others. So far it seems to be, the Gospels trump everything else because they are the teachings of Christ. Is that pretty close?

This is basically correct. The most accurate way of describing this is that I feel the gospels are closer to a documentary of the events, while Paul's letters, et al, are personal interpretations of how these events should be lived. As a side note, and one I am having with Servant, I don't trust John quite as much simply because of us being unsure of the exact author, and it being so dated as compared to the rest of them. I use John personally, but regard it as closer to a personal interpretation of a documentary.

When I am looking for solid fact upon which to base my theology, I go to Matt, Mark, and Luke and sometimes Acts. I read John, Paul's letters, etc as informative, interesting and a personal viewpoint to be examined, but I do not read them as scripture.

3. The deity of Christ. Was Jesus divine? Or was he a sinless man that had a unique connection/relationship to God. Or both? Or something else.

Undecided. Tradition states he was divine. But there are verses which make me pause as to what they actually mean. The idea of the trinity is certainly a complicated one. I lean towards the idea that God the father's spirit IS the holy spirit, IS inside of Jesus directing him. Now Was Jesus himself this actual spirit or was he a chosen and unique one given the spirit directly? I am undecided.

I don't have any problem with what you've so far presented on salvation. I do, however, think you are too preoccupied with where Mahatma is spending eternity. That decision is not up to us and is irrelevant to what we should believe regarding Christian doctrine or salvation. This issue with Ghandi seems to be a catalyst for you to alter your theology. Just an observation, for what it's worth.

It certainly gave me pause to think and study. Yes catalyst is a good word. But only a catalyst. It didn't lead me solely to my conclusions. It only forced me to re-read the gospels carefully. The Gospels are my primary source for my beliefs.

I need a little clarification here. If God was trying to get a message to the gentiles that would appeal to them, why did God select a staunch Jew - Paul - to deliver that message? That would have exacerbated the problem, yes? The physcial resurrection of the dead was a Jewish belief and part of the early gospel. It wasn't preached only by Paul. It was preached by other disciples as well.

Actually it was genius. Paul was a roman citizen. He was a former Jew. But now he was preaching a message for which most Jews hated him. I believe this would have given him credibility in the gentiles eyes.

I don't think it's heresy to say that salvation is based on one's heart. Some of those doctrines are doctrines for salvation, so acceptance of some of them is by default mandatory for salvation. I do agree that acceptance of Church traditions is not a prerequisite for salvation. It's important to distinguish between the two.

But if salvation is a matter of the heart, then a Muslim can enter heaven correct? This would be regarded as heresy to most Christians.

And Paul's exclusion idea may have been a mistype on my part because I can not remember where I was going with this. What I meant to write was the church's exclusion ideology was not something I agreed with. In other words, due to my view on salvation, I think it is possible for someone to be a Muslim and go to heaven.

[servant]

I do not think that belief in the resurrection is criteria for salvation.

One quick side note. What do you think you need salvation from?

One other note. Although the author of the book of John is being debated by scholars it appears the author or authors were eye witnesses to Jesus.

[Goose]

[achilles12604]

[alexiarose]

I have finally found a title which I think describes my religious views. I have created a usergroup to match. I accept many of the tenants of Christianity. I accept many of the core values and teachings. In fact let me just list them out.

I accept God exists.

Agreed

I accept Jesus was his son and unique among men.

Agreed

I accept that Jesus death atoned for sin.

Don't agree.

I accept that Jesus performed miracles.

Pehaps miracles for that time that we would consider natural science today. But actual miracles, I can't.

I accept that God inspired many of the writers of the bible.

I think many of the writers wanted to record their testimony to the best of their recollection. But I don't think it was inspired by God.

I accept that God inspired other great men of different faiths like Gandhi

No. I think faith itself inspired great men. God didn't have to be the cause.

I accept that salvation is a matter of the heart and faith is a byproduct or a symptom of the condition of this heart.

I think it transcends anything materialistic as we know in existence. It has nothing to do with the heart or any other physical object.

I accept that much of the bible can not be read literally

Which is why I dont' think it was really inspired by God.

I accept that some of the stories of the bible are nothing more than stories, nor were they ever meant to be more than this.

Same as above

I accept that people of other faiths have the potential for salvation just as any Christian would

I accept it, but cannot support it. Scripture won't allow us to.

I accept that the church has fallen far from where it originated.

Churches are social functions. They have little to nothing to do with God.

I accept that the writings of Paul and the other disciples, while lead by God, are still personal interpretations and therefore subject to personal bias.

Again, I disagree with the involvement of God.

I do not accept the church taught concept of original sin.

So are men not born sinners? If not, then why did Jesus die to atone for our sins?

I do not accept the sinlessness of Mary

Did anyone say she was sinless?

I do not accept the concept of sainthoods

But scripture acknowledges saints.

I do not accept that hell is a place for eternal torture in some fire lake

Gotta think a while on this one.

I accept (basically) some form of evolution/ID

I accept evolution but reject ID.

I do not accept a young earth creation model.

Agreed

I accept much of the current church as hypocritical and lazy

Agreed.

I accept that God reaches out to all men where ever they are through whatever beliefs they hold.

Not sure what you mean here.

I accept that God knows just about everything, but can not know individual futures nor do I think this idea is supported well by scripture.

I am not sure God really knows much more than life does.






Are you a true Christian. Only you can answer that.