Why progressive "Christians" are not Christians

[IndependantAce]

1. Progressive Christians don't actually believe in God creating the world. They take the creation story in the Bible and spin it to where "man" is actually the creator and the "creation" is a progressive socialist utopia and still a work in "progress".

So they're actually just progressives/utopian socialists following John Stuart Mill's atheist dogma and calling it "Christianity".

2. They usually deny hell, because this essentially fits in with the doctrines of atheists like Marquis de Sade who believe that morality is nonexistent. Therefore according to them a serial killer and a pedophile deserve as much right to "heaven" as a saint, simply because of their perverted socialist notion of "equality".

3. They skew the teachings of Christ to portray him has having been an advocate of state socialism or progressive social politics. In reality however Jesus affirmed the Old Testament law as being inspired by God. While Jesus may not have supported a theocratic government he nevertheless believed the teachings of the Old Law should still be used as moral guidance.

(Matt. 5:17-18)

In summary they're basically just atheistic progressives using Christianity as a "metaphor" for a doctrine which is actually completely atheistic and materialistic.

 

[Agit8r]

"Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need"
-- Acts 4:34-35

 

[IndependantAce]

"Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need"
-- Acts 4:34-35

}
It's easy to take Bible verses out of context to support foolish positions. Jesus never gave a perpetual command that people should be entirely deprived of wealth, he simply opposed the greedy and hypocritical lifestyle of the Pharisees.

“But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth“

"A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just."

 

[Agit8r]

"Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need"
-- Acts 4:34-35

}
It's easy to take Bible verses out of context to support foolish positions. Jesus never gave a perpetual command that people should be entirely deprived of wealth, he simply opposed the greedy and hypocritical lifestyle of the Pharisees.

“But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth“

"A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just."

According to the Book of Acts, that is the manner in which Christians under the guidance of the Holy Spirit lived. But if you wanna poo-poo the Holy Spirit, that's your business.

 

[forkup]

1. Progressive Christians don't actually believe in God creating the world. They take the creation story in the Bible and spin it to where "man" is actually the creator and the "creation" is a progressive socialist utopia and still a work in "progress".

So they're actually just progressives/utopian socialists following John Stuart Mill's atheist dogma and calling it "Christianity".

2. They usually deny hell, because this essentially fits in with the doctrines of atheists like Marquis de Sade who believe that morality is nonexistent. Therefore according to them a serial killer and a pedophile deserve as much right to "heaven" as a saint, simply because of their perverted socialist notion of "equality".

3. They skew the teachings of Christ to portray him has having been an advocate of state socialism or progressive social politics. In reality however Jesus affirmed the Old Testament law as being inspired by God. While Jesus may not have supported a theocratic government he nevertheless believed the teachings of the Old Law should still be used as moral guidance.

(Matt. 5:17-18)

In summary they're basically just atheistic progressives using Christianity as a "metaphor" for a doctrine which is actually completely atheistic and materialistic.

Ever taught the reason Christianity has progressed to a more and more alagoric reading of the bible, is that reading it litterally goes against secular law and scientific evidence?

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear IndependantAce true Christians rebuke and correct each other by Matthew 18:15-20 so that we bear true witness and establish agreement in Christ on God's truth at all times, casting out fear error and unforgiveness, by the authority of God through Christ Jesus, as restoring Truth Justice and Peace uniting and uplifting all humanity as one.

As we go through this process of righting wrongs and correcting and healing all relations along the way, this will bring out the true believer in all of us, whether Jew or Gentile , theist under scriptural authority or nontheist under secular and natural law. We are all under the laws of Universal Truth and Justice that God and Jesus represent as Lord or Law over all other authorities visible or invisible.

In Christ JESUS we are all made one, perfect whole and new. AMEN.

 

[IndependantAce]

"Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need"
-- Acts 4:34-35

}
It's easy to take Bible verses out of context to support foolish positions. Jesus never gave a perpetual command that people should be entirely deprived of wealth, he simply opposed the greedy and hypocritical lifestyle of the Pharisees.

“But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth“

"A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just."

According to the Book of Acts, that is the manner in which Christians under the guidance of the Holy Spirit lived. But if you wanna poo-poo the Holy Spirit, that's your business.

"Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need"
-- Acts 4:34-35

}
It's easy to take Bible verses out of context to support foolish positions. Jesus never gave a perpetual command that people should be entirely deprived of wealth, he simply opposed the greedy and hypocritical lifestyle of the Pharisees.

“But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth“

"A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just."

According to the Book of Acts, that is the manner in which Christians under the guidance of the Holy Spirit lived. But if you wanna poo-poo the Holy Spirit, that's your business.

They lived together in communes, much like the Franciscan monks do.

I'm not sure how living in a com
,

"Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need"
-- Acts 4:34-35

}
It's easy to take Bible verses out of context to support foolish positions. Jesus never gave a perpetual command that people should be entirely deprived of wealth, he simply opposed the greedy and hypocritical lifestyle of the Pharisees.

“But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth“

"A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just."

According to the Book of Acts, that is the manner in which Christians under the guidance of the Holy Spirit lived. But if you wanna poo-poo the Holy Spirit, that's your business.

They lived in communes much like Franciscan Friars do.

I'm not sure how you take living in a commune to mean "the state should redistribute money to bailout corporations and fund wars" - complete non-sequiter.

(And as far as I know, very few progressives live in communes to begin with)

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

'Why progressive "Christians" are not Christians'

This is so typical of the social right – and conservatism in general – the arrogance, the authoritarianism, and the desire to divide people, not bring them together.

Anyone is a Christian who claims to be a Christian – that’s not for others to decide.

The social right is in fact the bane of the American Nation.

 

[Agit8r]

(And as far as I know, very few progressives live in communes to begin with)

Yes. Typically "progressives" are in favor of a market economy.

 

[hobelim]

This is so typical of the social right – and conservatism in general – the arrogance, the authoritarianism, and the desire to divide people, not bring them together.

In a country that encourages the free expression of conflicting and contradictory religions where three of the major religions with billions of combined followers all believe that one day the entire world will adopt their particular religion, conflict and division is inevitable.

Isn't your own position against the social right and conservatism in general divisive? Whats wrong with that?

"By stirring the waters of contention, the truth is brought out."

When the truth comes to light, then all people will come together by standing on that firmament wherever the chips may fall. Until then people are bound to be set against each other and a person will continue find his enemies even under his own roof.

 

[alang1216]

I just returned from a vacation in Ireland. If you want to see the effects of one Christian group denying another is really Christian you should study their history. Spoiler alert, it is not a pretty picture. The people there I talked with were some of the most non-judgmental Christians I ever met. They had no desire to turn back the clock.

 

[BreezeWood]

using Christianity as a "metaphor"

.
That is possible because christianity is not a naturally occurring religion and is dependent on a publication for its existence rather than a physical verification as the Almighty's Garden Earth.

the publication itself is a metaphor for the subject it is addressing.

"All the world's a stage" - a script not withstanding ...

.

 

[Syriusly]

1. Progressive Christians don't actually believe in God c.

The rantings of another faux Christian trying to explain why he gets to decide who is a real Christian and who is not.

History is full of faux Christians like him all denouncing other Christian.

What assholes.

 

[emilynghiem]

using Christianity as a "metaphor"

.
That is possible because christianity is not a naturally occurring religion and is dependent on a publication for its existence rather than a physical verification as the Almighty's Garden Earth.

the publication itself is a metaphor for the subject it is addressing.

"All the world's a stage" - a script not withstanding ...

.

Disagree BreezeWood
I challenge you to the Bullring on this.

Christianity is independent of the Bible which expresses it,
where even Jesus did not rely on the Bible but often on parables to teach the CONCEPTS
of the Kingdom of God that far surpass the limits of written words in the Bible.

What you might be talking about is when Christian rebuke
each other, they may rely on the Bible as their common language for communicating.

However, this is not the only way to do Christian rebuke.
I have seen plenty of people do this using
the Constitution for Constitutionalists,
science and reason with atheists,
Buddhist teachings for Buddhists etc etc.

The process is universal of "Restorative Justice"
that isn't limited to just using the Bible to teach it.
it depends on the audience and people who are sharing with each other
"to establish God's truth through agreement in Christ"

Jesus did this all the time without using the Bible,
but the spirit of the laws expressed therein.

The Bible is a tool to establish agreement.
But it is only necessasry if people use it or agree to use it.

I have atheist friends who don't use it but
still the principles of Christianity are what we are using
to forgive, correct and heal in our relationships.

What I challenge you on BreezeWood
is the Bible is as necessary for Christians to reach agreement in Christ
as the Constitution is for Constitutionalists to reach agreement on laws.
Since the Constitution is not in the Bible literally
this shows that it takes more than the Bible to
establish God's word or universal truth
by teaching "Restorative Justice" which is the meaning of Christ Jesus.

The Bible may be key to agreeing on "Restorative Justice"
but so is the Constitution that isn't literally in there!
We need understanding of those laws also if we are going
to CONDUCT due process and redressing grievances
in order to REACH agreement on truth as in the Bible.

Bullring or agreement, BreezeWood?

 

[BreezeWood]

using Christianity as a "metaphor"

.
That is possible because christianity is not a naturally occurring religion and is dependent on a publication for its existence rather than a physical verification as the Almighty's Garden Earth.

the publication itself is a metaphor for the subject it is addressing.

"All the world's a stage" - a script not withstanding ...

.

Disagree BreezeWood
I challenge you to the Bullring on this.

Christianity is independent of the Bible which expresses it,
where even Jesus did not rely on the Bible but often on parables to teach the CONCEPTS
of the Kingdom of God that far surpass the limits of written words in the Bible.

What you might be talking about is when Christian rebuke
each other, they may rely on the Bible as their common language for communicating.

However, this is not the only way to do Christian rebuke.
I have seen plenty of people do this using
the Constitution for Constitutionalists,
science and reason with atheists,
Buddhist teachings for Buddhists etc etc.

The process is universal of "Restorative Justice"
that isn't limited to just using the Bible to teach it.
it depends on the audience and people who are sharing with each other
"to establish God's truth through agreement in Christ"

Jesus did this all the time without using the Bible,
but the spirit of the laws expressed therein.

The Bible is a tool to establish agreement.
But it is only necessasry if people use it or agree to use it.

I have atheist friends who don't use it but
still the principles of Christianity are what we are using
to forgive, correct and heal in our relationships.

What I challenge you on BreezeWood
is the Bible is as necessary for Christians to reach agreement in Christ
as the Constitution is for Constitutionalists to reach agreement on laws.
Since the Constitution is not in the Bible literally
this shows that it takes more than the Bible to
establish God's word or universal truth
by teaching "Restorative Justice" which is the meaning of Christ Jesus.

The Bible may be key to agreeing on "Restorative Justice"
but so is the Constitution that isn't literally in there!
We need understanding of those laws also if we are going
to CONDUCT due process and redressing grievances
in order to REACH agreement on truth as in the Bible.

Bullring or agreement, BreezeWood?

.

Jesus did this all the time without using the Bible

That is possible because christianity is not a naturally occurring religion and is dependent on a publication for its existence

the truth emily is without the bible there is no natural means for knowing Jesus ever existed, and because he did not leave for posterity a physical representation would undoubtedly by his own action agree with those who believe the true religion representing the Almighty is the one passed through verbal tradition and intuition.

if the shoe fits ... the path will be found irregardless the means.

Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani 'My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?'

the above is an example of oral tradition - I read only the first page of the bible before setting it down however many of its passages I know from heart and the one above is one that would not be repeated if it were not meaningful.

forsaken from Jesus is a strong statement of disbelief.

.

 

[emilynghiem]

using Christianity as a "metaphor"

.
That is possible because christianity is not a naturally occurring religion and is dependent on a publication for its existence rather than a physical verification as the Almighty's Garden Earth.

the publication itself is a metaphor for the subject it is addressing.

"All the world's a stage" - a script not withstanding ...

.

Disagree BreezeWood
I challenge you to the Bullring on this.

Christianity is independent of the Bible which expresses it,
where even Jesus did not rely on the Bible but often on parables to teach the CONCEPTS
of the Kingdom of God that far surpass the limits of written words in the Bible.

What you might be talking about is when Christian rebuke
each other, they may rely on the Bible as their common language for communicating.

However, this is not the only way to do Christian rebuke.
I have seen plenty of people do this using
the Constitution for Constitutionalists,
science and reason with atheists,
Buddhist teachings for Buddhists etc etc.

The process is universal of "Restorative Justice"
that isn't limited to just using the Bible to teach it.
it depends on the audience and people who are sharing with each other
"to establish God's truth through agreement in Christ"

Jesus did this all the time without using the Bible,
but the spirit of the laws expressed therein.

The Bible is a tool to establish agreement.
But it is only necessasry if people use it or agree to use it.

I have atheist friends who don't use it but
still the principles of Christianity are what we are using
to forgive, correct and heal in our relationships.

What I challenge you on BreezeWood
is the Bible is as necessary for Christians to reach agreement in Christ
as the Constitution is for Constitutionalists to reach agreement on laws.
Since the Constitution is not in the Bible literally
this shows that it takes more than the Bible to
establish God's word or universal truth
by teaching "Restorative Justice" which is the meaning of Christ Jesus.

The Bible may be key to agreeing on "Restorative Justice"
but so is the Constitution that isn't literally in there!
We need understanding of those laws also if we are going
to CONDUCT due process and redressing grievances
in order to REACH agreement on truth as in the Bible.

Bullring or agreement, BreezeWood?

.

Jesus did this all the time without using the Bible

That is possible because christianity is not a naturally occurring religion and is dependent on a publication for its existence

the truth emily is without the bible there is no natural means for knowing Jesus ever existed, and because he did not leave for posterity a physical representation would undoubtedly by his own action agree with those who believe the true religion representing the Almighty is the one passed through verbal tradition and intuition.

if the shoe fits ... the path will be found irregardless the means.

Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani 'My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?'

the above is an example of oral tradition - I read only the first page of the bible before setting it down however many of its passages I know from heart and the one above is one that would not be repeated if it were not meaningful.

forsaken from Jesus is a strong statement of disbelief.

.

Not necessary BreezeWood!

People can teach about Justice and the DIFFERENCE
between Retributive Justice and Restorative Justice
using natural laws that God/Jesus govern over in SPIRIT.

How do you think Atheists and secular humanists receive this?
Christ Jesus MEANS Restorative Justice.
This can be taught independent of believing in a historical Jesus,
the concept is the same even if Jesus is completely mythical to people.
They are still governed by the laws of justice, and learn by example.

The same way Jesus shared the Kingdom of God
with ILLITERATE fishermen and farmers WITHOUT using the Bible.

Our faith cannot depend on anything material, even the Bible.
Or that is "conditional" whereas God's love and truth
are unconditional and exceed limitations and language of man.

God's love and truth do not depend on our written language to survive
but quite the opposite. Our thoughts words and actions depend on
consistency with God's true universal laws in order to have standing.

 

[BreezeWood]

using Christianity as a "metaphor"

.
That is possible because christianity is not a naturally occurring religion and is dependent on a publication for its existence rather than a physical verification as the Almighty's Garden Earth.

the publication itself is a metaphor for the subject it is addressing.

"All the world's a stage" - a script not withstanding ...

.

Disagree BreezeWood
I challenge you to the Bullring on this.

Christianity is independent of the Bible which expresses it,
where even Jesus did not rely on the Bible but often on parables to teach the CONCEPTS
of the Kingdom of God that far surpass the limits of written words in the Bible.

What you might be talking about is when Christian rebuke
each other, they may rely on the Bible as their common language for communicating.

However, this is not the only way to do Christian rebuke.
I have seen plenty of people do this using
the Constitution for Constitutionalists,
science and reason with atheists,
Buddhist teachings for Buddhists etc etc.

The process is universal of "Restorative Justice"
that isn't limited to just using the Bible to teach it.
it depends on the audience and people who are sharing with each other
"to establish God's truth through agreement in Christ"

Jesus did this all the time without using the Bible,
but the spirit of the laws expressed therein.

The Bible is a tool to establish agreement.
But it is only necessasry if people use it or agree to use it.

I have atheist friends who don't use it but
still the principles of Christianity are what we are using
to forgive, correct and heal in our relationships.

What I challenge you on BreezeWood
is the Bible is as necessary for Christians to reach agreement in Christ
as the Constitution is for Constitutionalists to reach agreement on laws.
Since the Constitution is not in the Bible literally
this shows that it takes more than the Bible to
establish God's word or universal truth
by teaching "Restorative Justice" which is the meaning of Christ Jesus.

The Bible may be key to agreeing on "Restorative Justice"
but so is the Constitution that isn't literally in there!
We need understanding of those laws also if we are going
to CONDUCT due process and redressing grievances
in order to REACH agreement on truth as in the Bible.

Bullring or agreement, BreezeWood?

.

Jesus did this all the time without using the Bible

That is possible because christianity is not a naturally occurring religion and is dependent on a publication for its existence

the truth emily is without the bible there is no natural means for knowing Jesus ever existed, and because he did not leave for posterity a physical representation would undoubtedly by his own action agree with those who believe the true religion representing the Almighty is the one passed through verbal tradition and intuition.

if the shoe fits ... the path will be found irregardless the means.

Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani 'My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?'

the above is an example of oral tradition - I read only the first page of the bible before setting it down however many of its passages I know from heart and the one above is one that would not be repeated if it were not meaningful.

forsaken from Jesus is a strong statement of disbelief.

.

Not necessary BreezeWood!

People can teach about Justice and the DIFFERENCE
between Retributive Justice and Restorative Justice
using natural laws that God/Jesus govern over in SPIRIT.

How do you think Atheists and secular humanists receive this?
Christ Jesus MEANS Restorative Justice.
This can be taught independent of believing in a historical Jesus,
the concept is the same even if Jesus is completely mythical to people.
They are still governed by the laws of justice, and learn by example.

The same way Jesus shared the Kingdom of God
with ILLITERATE fishermen and farmers WITHOUT using the Bible.

Our faith cannot depend on anything material, even the Bible.
Or that is "conditional" whereas God's love and truth
are unconditional and exceed limitations and language of man.

God's love and truth do not depend on our written language to survive
but quite the opposite. Our thoughts words and actions depend on
consistency with God's true universal laws in order to have standing.

.

Our thoughts words and actions depend on
consistency with God's true universal laws in order to have standing.

I am sympathetic with most of your post ...

are you sure they are God's true and universal laws or simply those necessary for the Spirit's Admission to the Everlasting being our own choice and the stepping stones for new adventures, christianity not withstanding.


Why progressive "Christians" are not Christians

the OP however is interpreting a book and not natural laws for what would not even exist were it not written, the intent being his for himself.

.

 

[emilynghiem]

I am sympathetic with most of your post ...

are you sure they are God's true and universal laws or simply those necessary for the Spirit's Admission to the Everlasting being our own choice and the stepping stones for new adventures, christianity not withstanding.

^ Very good BreezeWood ^ THIS is why it is important to establish AGREEMENT on truth.
So we CAN weed out what is personal or selfish ambition and bias,
and what is so universal that it speaks to all people, especially diverse witnesses who agree it is truth.
EXACTLY, BreezeWood, this is why we need to come together in agreement across tribes
that God has created for this purpose, to bring diverse knowledge together and establish ONE truth. Whatever is consistent across ALL human barriers and biases, we know only God's truth can meet that standard.

Why progressive "Christians" are not Christians

the OP however is interpreting a book and not natural laws for what would not even exist were it not written, the intent being his for himself.

Yes and no. Some of the objections have reasons that do reflect natural laws, and conflicts with that.
So even in a biased presentation, we can weed out what is relative and what is universal.
After all, BW, the author's opinion, however biased or self serving,
is still part of a process of working out conflicts and reaching a consensus.
So it is a helpful tool also, where it is used properly to establish truth and correct error.

Thanks, BreezeWood I really respect and am grateful for your
posts and contributions here. When there is a more organized, concerted
effort to establish a consensus on God's laws, I hope you will be right there helping others
to discuss and work out these same issues facing people from many different groups.
It's not just an issue of Christianity but all tribes aligning in the spirit of truth,
using whatever languages, books, or other resources they use to communicate.
This is good and helpful for everyone, so thank you for this! Yours truly, Emily

 

[sealybobo]

1. Progressive Christians don't actually believe in God creating the world. They take the creation story in the Bible and spin it to where "man" is actually the creator and the "creation" is a progressive socialist utopia and still a work in "progress".

So they're actually just progressives/utopian socialists following John Stuart Mill's atheist dogma and calling it "Christianity".

2. They usually deny hell, because this essentially fits in with the doctrines of atheists like Marquis de Sade who believe that morality is nonexistent. Therefore according to them a serial killer and a pedophile deserve as much right to "heaven" as a saint, simply because of their perverted socialist notion of "equality".

3. They skew the teachings of Christ to portray him has having been an advocate of state socialism or progressive social politics. In reality however Jesus affirmed the Old Testament law as being inspired by God. While Jesus may not have supported a theocratic government he nevertheless believed the teachings of the Old Law should still be used as moral guidance.

(Matt. 5:17-18)

In summary they're basically just atheistic progressives using Christianity as a "metaphor" for a doctrine which is actually completely atheistic and materialistic.

If you don't believe God said this then how can you call yourself a christian?

"'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. for they are guilty of a capital offense.