Rodion_Raskolnikov_ Posted July 8, 2015 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 141 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 145 Days Won: 1 Joined: 03/05/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/02/1974 Share Posted July 8, 2015 ... Anyway...If I understand you corectly...you're saying that to reduce God's Will to a simple matter of relative moral principles is the same thing as having no morality at all (in practice). If that's what you mean I couldn't agree with you more.... You're actually agreeing with David Carlin, the article's author, who is a professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island at Newport. I saw this and went back to re-read the article. Yes, I think I do agree with him. I agree with his conclusions regardless of the intent of his reasoning. I 'do not' agree with "liberal" Christianity. God is real. His (God's) Word is Law. There is an objective standard that is derived from our Creator. We may hair split about said standards, but they do exist. Across the board. To make morality a relative thing is to kill morality all together. Just like the absence of God inevitably destroys morality. If there is a God (which there is) then morality exists. If there is no God, everything is (logically) relative, concerning morality. When people can't deny these facts they attempt to make Gods Will relative. Wrong. Either there is a God, with an absolute morality, or there is nothing other than moral relativism. I don't care if you call it "liberal" morality, or anything else. Same difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedOnebyGrace Posted October 5, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 11 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,054 Content Per Day: 15.41 Reputation: 5,191 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/30/2023 Status: Offline Share Posted October 5, 2015 Blessings Old School Well,Brother ,,,,,,,I did take the time to read the link you provided & that is what baffled me,,,,,,,,I didn't know much of anything about Liberal Christianity before you shared the article here...........so,if I may encourage you not to question whether or not to post things such as these on the forums,,,,by all means you should However,I don't think it is good to assume that no one has read the article because it has rendered them clueless................I was commenting on what these folks(Liberals) said(fully understanding what quotation marks mean)and from what I could see,Rusty Angel was doing the same............are comments not welcome? I also appreciate Shiloh explaining even further Liberal Christianity rejects Jesus as the only way to God. posted by Shiloh As I said,before your sharing this ,I had no knowledge of their beliefs,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, With love-in Christ,KwikYou are right. If a person is going to link to an article, it should be pretty clear what the person is hoping to show by that link. This is not so much a knock against "Old School", I'm fairly sure I've made the same mistake at one time or another. I certainly didn't understand "Old School" was against "Liberal" Christianity the first time I read through what was written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thereselittleflower Posted October 5, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 58 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 5,457 Content Per Day: 1.70 Reputation: 4,220 Days Won: 37 Joined: 07/01/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted October 5, 2015 Hey Kwik... He is quoting what is at the heart of Liberal Christianity....I'm also quoting directly from the article, which apparently no one but you bothered to read.Thank you for taking the time to actually read it before posting. However, I'm seriously questioning whether I should post anything on forums where readers are so clueless about what quotation marks actually mean.I use the indent feature to set off what I quote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonky Posted October 23, 2015 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 6 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 738 Content Per Day: 0.20 Reputation: 346 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/28/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted October 23, 2015 yesIf we were to truly reduce religion down to it's core it's really about avoiding non-existence. The hope of a pleasant afterlife. Is that not what this is all about?most people on earth die anyway - they have no hope in Christ Jesus, even thoughthey have 'religion'. Religion deceives them, lets them think they are somehow okay or all that they can be as far as life is concerned. It doesn't save them, but tells them they are saved (see the 1.7 billion souls lost in the rcc this way - best worse example in the world; nuns and monks think their saved by their religion and that their religion somehow can help others; TOTAL LIE) .. but their RELIGION tells them it's OKAY. unless they find the one true God, by His grace in Yeshua, they die in their sin -nothing , nothing, not anything in the roman abomination produces life or forgives sin. it exponentially increases sin on earth, death to many souls, destruction of many lives and families. and this is today, right now, and it is increasing its power,deceiving/ committing fornication with all the leaders of all the governments on earth,forming an alliance by and with satan's power and deception...... total evil."They have no hope in Jesus Christ..."Hope for what? Eternal life right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts