 Posted Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:22 PM
|
|
|
|
John:
Evidently you've not met someone like my mother outside the CS church as you were evangelizing. With the tonal qualities of an Ethel Merman she would begin laughing hysterically as if you were the evening entertainment.
Broncho:
"......celestial brownie points." Interesting way of putting it and, I'm afraid, totally accurate. I could not consider myself born again if witnessing was a prerequisite. I'm great on the stage speaking someone else's words, but my lips would be stilled in a situation as they describe. Salesmen are 'born,' not made and I think that describes the situation here......even if I believed in the product.
Nyoka
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, March 02, 2005 9:15 AM
|
|
|
|
"...These are people who read their bible, they know about Jesus, they are not lost sheep looking for God. Just because their brand of Christianity differs from yours is really no excuse for this sort of thing..."
Broncho:
I'm a bit confused. Do you still see CS as being a Christian denomination, and that those in it are following the teachings of the Bible and Jesus Christ?
John
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:24 AM
|
|
|
|
I'm a bit confused by this phrase "I'm a bit confused" being used in abundance by some of you CWs (not Linda, though, she's above being condescending).
You don't understand the English language?
Nyoka (sorry, Broncho, for butting in)
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:30 AM
|
|
|
|
Nyoka: I merely want to know whether Broncho (and I'll ask you the same question) considers CS to be a true Christian denomination, or a totally separate or different religion which masks itself as being Christian. If so, on what critieria or basis would they be judged to just another denomination?
John
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, March 02, 2005 6:18 PM
|
|
|
|
Dear John,
Christian Science isn't born again style Christianity, we agree on this. Yes, S&H deviates from the Bible in significant ways. The fact remains, it does try to deal with the life of Christ and follows much of what Jesus said. The Bible is read at all the services. It may not be pure born again Christianity, but it is closer to Christianity than Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Mormonism, etc. It is on the Christian spectrum.
Born-agains don't own the word Christian.
Broncho
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:08 PM
|
|
|
|
"Nyoka: I merely want to know whether Broncho (and I'll ask you the same question) considers CS to be a true Christian denomination, or a totally separate or different religion which masks itself as being Christian. If so, on what critieria or basis would they be judged to just another denomination?"
John, I should respond to this but feel you've painted me into a corner. From my perspective, aside from a couple members of my family, I don't know any people who actually read the Bible or even consider it an important part of their lives. Shocking as this may sound to you, it probably is true of many of your own acquaintances, office workers, grocery checkers, gas station attendants, movie concession personnel, dry cleaner counter people, bus drivers, car mechanics, doctors, nurses, pharmacists, insurance salesmen, airline flight attendants, people everywhere who don't read the Bible, many have no copies in their homes. Now, considering this, I think Christian Scientists do pick up their Bibles (many every day), so do I consider them a Christian 'denomination'? Probably, but certainly would not pass your quality assurance program.
Masking as Christians? Maybe, maybe not. Nobody knows. Criteria? Nothing that would satisfy you.
Nyoka
|
|
|
Posted Friday, March 04, 2005 9:37 AM
|
|
|
|
"Yes, S&H deviates from the Bible in significant ways. The fact remains, it does try to deal with the life of Christ and follows much of what Jesus said... It is on the Christian spectrum.
Broncho:
I am curious. Can you personally give me some specifics on how you think S&H "follows much of what Jesus said", and therefore would be on the Christian Spectrum.
John
|
|
|
Posted Friday, March 04, 2005 10:02 AM
|
|
|
|
Nyoka:
From the drift of what you say, am I to conclude that because someone (e.g, CS'ists) reads the Bible regularly, that would make them Christians?
Not to be facetious or insulting, I if were to read excepts of Mein Kampf regularly for some reason, would that make me a Nazi? Or, say the Koran. If I read the Koran, does that make me a Muslim?
While I would never be affiliated with or attempt to speak for either group, I think both would say you would need to take the teachings of either to heart to be considered one or the other respectively, not just read them. Also, I believe both groups would say that introducing outside works which would redefine or rewrite the message of the authors of either of these books would be totally unacceptable.(E.g., in the case of the latter, that the writings of Elijah Mohammed are in any way Muslim, even though the Black Muslims call themselves just that. Why? because they are clearly at odds with the Koran). Yet, MBE says that we need to accept a total rewriting or redefintion of over 100 english words in S&H in order to properly understand the Scriptures, and therefore practice Christianity.
It is in this context that I ask you and others who have parted ways with CS if you can still consider it Christian.
John
|
|
|
Posted Friday, March 04, 2005 10:22 AM
|
|
|
|
Rather than pick apart people's beliefs based on how we believe, I've found it effective to at least try to find a common ground.
What is essential for someone for someone to be saved? Can someone be right in the essentials and wrong about everything else and still be saved? Do they need to be right about anything?
I'm, of course, convinced that I have a lot right. Otherwise, I should not share.  I'm also convinced, however, that I don't have it all right. Thus, I share and pray to be led to refinement of my beliefs as directed by the Holy Spirit. There are many Christian denominations that would not consider me saved simply because I am not a member of their church. Others would not consider me saved because my church practices infant Baptism. Who must intervene for someone to be truly saved?
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Friday, March 04, 2005 2:38 PM
|
|
|
|
What is necessary to be saved according to various writings in the Bible:
Matt. 24:13 says that he who endures to the end shall be saved.
Mark 16:16 says that to be saved you must believe and be baptized.
Acts 16:31 says you must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved.
Romans 10:13 says that those who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Eph. 2:8 says that we are saved by grace through faith.
Romans 10:9 says that if you confess the Lord Jesus with your mouth and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead that you will be saved.
What is the minimum requirement to be saved? Is it to have an inner belief in Jesus Christ? Faith in him? If one accepts Mark 16:16 as the criterion, does this mean that if someone comes to believe but dies before he can be baptized, is he lost? The letter to the Romans seems to be saying that to be saved requires an outward verbal confession with one's mouth of one's belief in Jesus (not just an inner belief or faith), and it also adds a requirement that one believe in one's heart that God raised Jesus from the dead. Finally, Matthew's gospel seems to be saying that one has to pass some kind of edurance test until the end of a period of time before salvation is assured.
Once again, what is the minimum requirement for salvation, where absolutely nothing else is necessary. Is baptism absolutely necessary? Is it necessary to confess one's belief in Jesus verbally, or can it be done only in one's own heart? If the minimum requirement for salvation can be fulfilled by meeting the requirements in one of the above statements from the Bible, is it necessary to try to follow the example of Jesus or attempt to put into practice any of his teachings? Granted, one may say that the Holy Spirit will inspire the saved individual to follow Jesus in daily life, but is any such following necessary for salvation?
|
|
|
|