missmuffet Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,992 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,690 Content Per Day: 11.79 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 (edited) Question: "What is Progressive Christianity, and is it biblical?" Answer: Progressive Christianity is a recent movement in Protestantism that focuses strongly on social justice and environmentalism and often includes a revisionist (or non-traditional) view of the Scriptures. Since the movement entails a number of different beliefs and views on various topics, it is difficult to label the whole movement decisively as “biblical” or “unbiblical.” Each claim and belief of any movement should be filtered through the Word of God, and whatever does not line up with Scripture should be rejected. The Bible is replete with instructions to “visit orphans and widows in their distress” (James 1:27, NASB) and to protect the environment that God has entrusted to us (Genesis 1:28). Insofar as Progressive Christianity is a movement that seeks to emphasize and honor these principles, it certainly lines up with Scripture. However, there are some aspects of Progressive Christianity that contradict a biblical worldview. In general, members of this movement do not ascribe to the biblical doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture, and, again, in general, do not believe that the Bible is the literal Word of God. Progressive Christianity also tends to emphasize what is known as “collective salvation” over the biblical concept of personal salvation. The Bible is clear that God redeems those individuals who believe in Jesus Christ as Savior and rescues them from an eternity of being separated from Him in torment. Collective salvation, by contrast, emphasizes the restoration of whole cultures and societies to what progressive Christians believe is the correct socioeconomic structure, namely, Marxism. Marxism, in turn, is a theory of economics and politics developed by an atheist (Karl Marx) from unbiblical assumptions. In this sense, then, the views of many progressive Christians do not fit with biblical principles. In the end, however, discretion is needed in evaluating a particular claim or belief in terms of Scripture; the whole spectrum of beliefs identified by the term “Progressive Christianity” is too broad to permit an unequivocal conclusion as to whether or not it can be labeled unbiblical. As with all uncertain issues, the Christian would do well to compare each claim of those in the Progressive Christianity movement with Scripture, asking God for the wisdom to discern truth from error. He has promised wisdom to all who seek it (James 1:5). https://www.gotquestions.org/Progressive-Christianity.html Edited November 7, 2019 by missmuffet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Bought 1953 Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 13 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,726 Content Per Day: 2.87 Reputation: 6,258 Days Won: 5 Joined: 12/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 Tripe. Pure and simple ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Adams Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 25 Topic Count: 61 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 9,606 Content Per Day: 3.96 Reputation: 7,795 Days Won: 21 Joined: 09/11/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 ..and the church heavily edited scripture to suit its doctrines. They removed most supernatural content and made Augustine the father of the faith. Then thru the centuries they beat/killed people for various infractions so that today our kids want super heroes and our parents want extended lifetimes. Anything that caters to this need for meaning and content seems to be flavor-of-the-week and rules are written on chalk boards since that is what they are taught in the pews. Look to ourselves brothers and sisters. We sowed this and now are reaping its whirlwind. Do not blame others. Take a look at the Dead Sea scrolls and see how MUCH we edited out of scripture. It is all there for you to see. Qumran was certainly Providential. So get ready to slay the messenger... whatever you do, do not take responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Bought 1953 Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 13 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,726 Content Per Day: 2.87 Reputation: 6,258 Days Won: 5 Joined: 12/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 I would be happy to discuss If with you.I got some stuff to do and I will be back later for our discussion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Bought 1953 Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 13 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,726 Content Per Day: 2.87 Reputation: 6,258 Days Won: 5 Joined: 12/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 4 minutes ago, Blood Bought 1953 said: I would be happy to discuss If with you.I got some stuff to do and I will be back later for our discussion... Until I return, here is something everyone can feast on.... "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the Gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures" (1st Corinthians 15:1-4). It might seem almost a work of supererogation to answer a question like this. We hear the word, "Gospel" used so many times. People talk of this and of that as being "as true as the Gospel," and I often wonder what they really mean by it. First I should like to indicate what it is not. THE GOSPEL IS... Not The Bible In the first place, the Gospel is not the Bible. Often when I inquire, "What do you think the Gospel is?" people reply, "Why, it is the Bible, and the Bible is the Word of God." Undoubtedly the Bible is the Word of God, but there is a great deal in that Book that is not Gospel. "The wicked shall be turned into Hell with all the nations that forget God." That is in the Bible, and it is terribly true; but it is not Gospel. "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." That is in the Bible, but it is not the Gospel. Our English word, "gospel" just means the "good spell," and the word "spell," is the old Anglo-Saxon word for, "tidings", the good tidings, the good news. The original word translated. "Gospel," which we have taken over into the English with little alteration is the word, "evangel," and it has the same meaning, the good news. The Gospel is God's good news for sinners. The Bible contains the Gospel, but there is a great deal in the Bible which is not Gospel. Not The Commandments The Gospel is not just any message from God telling man how he should behave. "What is the Gospel?" I asked a man this question some time ago, and he answered, "Why I should say it is the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount, and I think if a man lives up to them he is all right." Well, I fancy he would be; but did you ever know anybody who lived up to them? The Sermon on the Mount demands a righteousness which no unregenerate man has been able to produce. The law is not the Gospel; it is the very antitheses of the Gospel. In fact, the law was given by God to show men their need of the Gospel . "The law," says the Apostle Paul, speaking as a Jewish convert, "was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. But after that Christ is come we are no longer under the schoolmaster." Not Repentance The Gospel is not a call to repentance, or to amendment of our ways, to make restitution for past sins, or to promise to do better in the future. These things are proper in their place, but they do not constitute the Gospel; for the Gospel is not good advice to be obeyed, it is good news to be believed. Do not make the mistake then of thinking that the Gospel is a call to duty or a call to reformation, a call to better your condition, to behave yourself in a more perfect way than you have been doing in the past. Not Giving Up The World Nor is the Gospel a demand that you give up the world, that you give up your sins, that you break off bad habits, and try to cultivate good ones. You may do all these things, and yet never believe the Gospel and consequently never be saved at all. THERE ARE SEVEN DESIGNATIONS OF THE GOSPEL in the New Testament, but over and above all these, let me draw your attention to the fact that when this blessed message is mentioned, it is invariably accompanied by the definite article. Over and over and over again in the New Testament we read of the Gospel. It is the Gospel not a Gospel. People tell us there are a great many different Gospels; but there is only ONE. When certain teachers came to the Galatians and tried to turn them away from the simplicity that was in Christ Jesus by teaching "another Gospel, "the apostle said that it was a different gospel, but not another; for there is none other than the Gospel. It is downright exclusive; it is God's revelation to sinful man. Not Comparative Religion The scholars of this world talk of the Science of Comparative Religions, and it is very popular now-a-days to say, "We cannot any longer go to heathen nations and preach to them as in the days gone by, because we are learning that their religions are just as good as ours, and the thing to do now is to share with them, to study the different religions, take the good out of them all, and in this way lead the world into a sense of brotherhood and unity." So in our great universities and colleges men study this Science of Comparative Religions, and they compare all these different religious systems one with another. There is a Science of Comparative Religions, but the Gospel is not one of them. All the different religions in the world may well be studied comparatively, for at rock bottom they are all alike; they all set men at trying to earn his own salvation. They may be called by different names, and the things that men are called to do maybe different in each case, but they all set men trying to save their own souls and earn their way into the favor of God. In this they stand in vivid contrast with the Gospel, for the Gospel is that glorious message that tells us what God has done for us in order that guilty sinners maybe saved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayin jade Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 44 Topic Count: 6,178 Topics Per Day: 0.87 Content Count: 43,795 Content Per Day: 6.20 Reputation: 11,243 Days Won: 58 Joined: 01/03/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted November 7, 2019 I would appreciate it if you would not hijack my thread. You are quite free to start your own. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_S Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 10 hours ago, Justin Adams said: Take a look at the Dead Sea scrolls and see how MUCH we edited out of scripture. It is all there for you to see. Could you give some examples that are more than grammatical and that have a reasonable amount of agreement. Pretty much the entire book of Isaiah has been found there and was almost word-for-word exact. I don't know of any full New Testament books and there are debates as to whether there are even any fragments. Most of the old testament books found there are fragmented as well and so great care needs to be taken in order to say for sure that something has changed from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Bought 1953 Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 13 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,726 Content Per Day: 2.87 Reputation: 6,258 Days Won: 5 Joined: 12/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, ayin jade said: I would appreciate it if you would not hijack my thread. You are quite free to start your own. Thanks. I will start a new thread later, Betha...you will recognize it easily .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Adams Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 25 Topic Count: 61 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 9,606 Content Per Day: 3.96 Reputation: 7,795 Days Won: 21 Joined: 09/11/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 31 minutes ago, Steve_S said: Most of the old testament books found there are fragmented as well and so great care needs to be taken in order to say for sure that something has changed from them. Most of the the stuff corroborates. Especially 'sons of God' and not the later Sethite view championed by Augustine and others. The inter-testament period is also very good at highlighting that the Tanak's use of sons of God AKA Psalm 82, Deut 23 and others. The 'modern' or altered translations said the 'sons of God' were the sons of Seth or worse still the sons of Israel. This is incoherent and anyway, Deut 32 mention of the sons of God cannot be 'sons of Israel' as Isarel was not a nation before the Babel scattering. The Divine Council comprises sons of God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_S Posted November 7, 2019 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2019 9 minutes ago, Justin Adams said: Most of the the stuff corroborates. Especially 'sons of God' and not the later Sethite view championed by Augustine and others. The inter-testament period is also very good at highlighting that the Tanak's use of sons of God AKA Psalm 82, Deut 23 and others. The 'modern' or altered translations said the 'sons of God' were the sons of Seth or worse still the sons of Israel. This is incoherent and anyway, Deut 32 mention of the sons of God cannot be 'sons of Israel' as Isarel was not a nation before the Babel scattering. The Divine Council comprises sons of God. This is a theological situation, though, not a textual situation. Nobody disputes that Hebrew says Bene Elohim (literally translated into virtually all English translations, accurately - the sons of God). The disputation is in the meaning of it, not whether the actual phrase has been changed in newer Masoretic scrolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts