Am I an evangelical? If not, what am I?

[bhsup]

I keep hearing people in other threads saying "evangelical christians are this, evangelical christians are that" and so forth. As I always thought I pretty much fell into the evangelical christian label box, yet don't seem to fit what some folks are saying they are, I'm a bit confused now. I figure the best way to find out is to ask you fine folks here in CFC OT, since we all know that the sum of all human wisdom is embodied within the minds of all the members here. To aid you all in your determination, I shall provide a very concise rundown of my beliefs...

REGARDING THE BIBLE
It is the divinely inspired/guided/directed/whatever word of God, and if The Bible claims some event happened, then it happened.

REGARDING CREATION
As I said above, if the Bible says it, then it's true. God created the world. It was not 7 days as we know days today. I'm not getting into detail here about that as I have posted it before in CFC OT, so look for it if you're curious. Suffice it to say that the earth being 4.5 billion years old is not in any way in conflict with Genesis. Does this make me an "ID" supporter? I don't know because frankly the whole "ID" conflict is weird. Just what does "ID" mean? Did an intelligence have a hand in designing the world? You betcha! Should that be taught in schools? Absolutely not, but neither should it be taught that the earth was made and evolution occured randomly with no intervention. Stick to the KNOWN facts, thank you kindly.

REGARDING CHRIST
He is our savior, king, messiah, ruler, blood sacrifice before God, and the Son of God. He is NOT God, that much is obvious via his own words in the New Testament. He is the only way to God, again by his own words, and all those who reject him are lost....
HOWEVER, AND THIS IS A HUGE HOWEVER...
Only God truly knows the heart of a man, and only God can judge a man insofar as to whether he shall be granted into the Kingdom of Heaven. That man goes against man and kills one another in the name of God because they believe differently is in my mind an abomination before God. It's that "I stand at the door and knock..." thing.

So how does this mesh with the Israelites being the chosen people of God? I've no idea and frankly couldn't care less. They are God's chosen people and it sure isn't the place of a lowly gentile to pass judgement on his chosen because they choose or don't choose to accept his son as the savior. That's between them and God.

REGARDING CURRENT MORAL ISSUES
Abortion: State sponsored mass-murder and the most horrific stain upon the collective soul of my nation and the world.

Death penalty: Just punishment for the most horrific crimes.

Drugs: As long as they are illegal, I think the full weight of the law should come crashing down upon all pushers and users. (Now excuse me while I take a break in the writing of this post so I can go outside and smoke a Camel).

REGARDING SATAN
Lucifer, The Morning Star, the fallen one. Oh, make no mistake, he most certainly does exist. As the saying goes, the greatest trick Satan ever performs is convincing people that he does not exist. He is the root of evil, but that does not excuse people who have committed evil acts, for we are creatures of free will (as God created us so) and we need not fall to the temptations of Satan.

REGARDING THE LAST DAYS
Read Revelation. Rapture, rise of Anti-Christ, successively worse plagues and disasters befall Earth and those left behind, Satan chained, Christ's glorious return as our sovereign King.

Okay, so there we have it. Obviously not everything is covered, but I think enough to let people get out their label makers and slap one on me.

Thank you all for helping me figure out what I am,

VRWCAgent, the friendly fundie!

 

[Perfection]

What's you're stance regarding the conversion of others?

 

[bhsup]

What's you're stance regarding the conversion of others?

I've no problem whatsoever with (and I am going to use these groups because they are the most well known in this regard) Mormon or Jehovah Witness style converting. Knock on a door, or in some other way engage someone on conversation, and speak to them of the truth and the grace of our Lord.

I have a slight problem [<- gross understatement] with forced conversion.

 

[Perfection]

I might have to slap the evangical label on you then.

 

[ybbor]

I go to an evangelical church and hate how it's used as a separate poll option in religion polls. people act like it's an entirely separate entity from protestantism, which it really isn't. It seems like evangelical is only used by non-protestants to talk about ulta-right-wing christian fundamentalists. Virtually a strawman.

Despite the name on my church, I'm a Christian first, a protestant second, and an evangelical last (if at all).

 

[CaptainF]

I'd say that you are very religious.

I don't really know what evangelical means.

 

[Homie]

REGARDING CHRIST
He is our savior, king, messiah, ruler, blood sacrifice before God, and the Son of God. He is NOT God, that much is obvious via his own words in the New Testament. He is the only way to God, again by his own words, and all those who reject him are lost....
HOWEVER, AND THIS IS A HUGE HOWEVER...
Only God truly knows the heart of a man, and only God can judge a man insofar as to whether he shall be granted into the Kingdom of Heaven. That man goes against man and kills one another in the name of God because they believe differently is in my mind an abomination before God. It's that "I stand at the door and knock..." thing.

This part definately does make you a non-evangelical, in fact, it makes you a non-Christian. The belief in the trinity is one of those core beliefs that describes a Christian, that is why mormons and Jehova's witnesses are not considered Christian, but an offshoot of Christianity.

You, my friend, would be a conservative Unitarian, unitarian because of your theological views, and conservative because of your political views.

I was considering the Unitarian camp for a little while, but came back to the trinity. BTW, DO NOT confuse yourself with a Unitarian Universalist, they are COMPLETELY different from your views, both theological and political, I don't know why they carry the word Unitarian in their name, when they aren't even unitarians, weird, I guess they used to be but changed.

 

[bhsup]

I'm a non-Christian? I know Christ died for my sins, I know he is the son of God, I know he is my savior and my King.

I would say that the trinity is a core belief for some Christians, not not for others.

 

[Mulholland]

You're a christian. A moderate christian at that. You believe in christ but are not willing to force that belief upon other people(that is noble). I for myself believe in a great spirit but there is no Jesus or no true record attached to it. I believe in good and bad action and thier consequences (buddists call this karma) I call it good forward thinking. I'm sure that we can both agree that thee is good action and bad action, and from whatever faith you come there is more in common than in opposition.

 

[Perfection]

Is Christ still divine in your view?

 

[bhsup]

Oh, he is most certainly divine. However, only his father (God), is worthy of worship. Christ himself said that in the Bible.

 

[Bill3000]

I was considering the Unitarian camp for a little while, but came back to the trinity. BTW, DO NOT confuse yourself with a Unitarian Universalist, they are COMPLETELY different from your views, both theological and political, I don't know why they carry the word Unitarian in their name, when they aren't even unitarians, weird, I guess they used to be but changed.

Yeah. The Unitarian camp in the UU camp comes from a form created in America.

Traditionally, Unitarianism is a form of Christianity. The term may refer to any belief about the nature of Jesus that affirms God as a singular entity and rejects the doctrine of the Trinity. Unitarianism was rebuffed by orthodox Christianity at the First Council of Nicaea in 325, but it resurfaced subsequently in Church history. Unitarian churches were formally established in Transylvania and Poland (by the Socinians) in the 16th Century. Michael Servetus, a Spanish proto-Unitarian, was burned at the stake in Geneva, in 1553, on the orders of John Calvin. Universalism started as a separate Christian "heresy," with its own long history. It also can be traced deep into Christian past, beginning with the earliest Church scholars. Both Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa preached its essentials. Universalism denies the doctrine of eternal damnation; instead, it proclaims a loving God who will redeem all souls. In 1793, Universalism emerged as a particular denomination in the United States, eventually called the Universalist Church of America.

In the United States, the Unitarian movement began primarily in the Congregational parish churches of New England. These churches, which may still be seen today in nearly every New England town square, trace their roots to the division of the Puritan colonies into parishes for the administration of their religious needs. Beginning in the late 18th century, a Unitarian movement began within some of these churches. As conflict grew between Unitarian and Trinitarian factions, Unitarians gained a key faculty position at Harvard in 1805. The dispute culminated in the foundation of the American Unitarian Association as a separate denomination in 1825.

After the schism, some of those churches remained within the Congregational fold, while others voted to become Unitarian. In the aftermath of their various historical circumstances, some of these churches became member congregations of the Congregational organization (later the United Church of Christ), others became Unitarian and eventually became part of the UUA. Universalist churches in contrast followed a different path, having begun as independent congregations beyond the bounds of the established Puritan churches entirely. Today, the UUA and the United Church of Christ cooperate jointly on quite a number of projects and social justice initiatives. In the 19th century, under the influence of Ralph Waldo Emerson (who had been a Unitarian minister) and other Transcendentalists, Unitarianism began its long journey from liberal Protestantism to its present more pluralist form.

Unitarians and Universalists often have had a great deal of common interests and communication between them; they have often been associated in the public's mind. That said, one observation made years ago about Unitarianism and Universalism to distinguish them, long before their consolidation, was that "Universalists believe that God is too good to condemn man, while Unitarians believe that man is too good to be condemned by God." Both Unitarianism and Universalism evolved over time into inclusive, tolerant religions. In 1961, the American Unitarian Association (AUA) was consolidated with the Universalist Church of America (UCA), thus forming the Unitarian Universalist Association. In the same year, the Canadian Unitarian Council (CUC) formed and became an arm of the UUA to service the needs and interest of Canadian Unitarian Universalists. In 2002, the CUC split off from the UUA, although the two denominations maintain a close working relationship.

Recently, the "borrowing" of religious rituals from other faith traditions by Unitarian Univeralists has come under closer scrutiny. [4] Many UUs have asked whether the indiscriminate taking of the words and rites from the religions of others, and their incorporation into pluralist UU religious services, would be seen as a form of unwelcomed cultural appropriation by those from whom such borrowing is undertaken. In many congregations, the question has not yet been directly posed such that a coherent answer can be provided. In other congregations, the questions have prompted inquiry into what it might be about "Western" religious traditions that encourages taking from other faith traditions about which there may only be a superficial understanding. Although these questions go to the heart of the UU tradition, facing these difficult questions has helped many UUs and many UU congregations strengthen their faith and their faith practices.

In 1995 the UUA helped establish the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists (ICUU) to connect unitarian and universalist faith traditions around the world.

But I'd agree - you're Unitarian. (Don't confuse it with UU ) The vast majority of modern day christianity is trinitarian. Catholic, Orthodox, and most Protestant churches are trinitarian.

 

[ybbor]

just out of curiosity, what do you think about the Holy Spirit?

 

[Perfection]

Oh, he is most certainly divine. However, only his father (God), is worthy of worship. Christ himself said that in the Bible.

I see, so sort of like an uber-angel?

 

[bhsup]

(Don't confuse it with UU )

Which one? The American F-15, the Egyptian War Chariot, ....

Argh!! I just spammed my own thread!

 

[blackheart]

This part definately does make you a non-evangelical, in fact, it makes you a non-Christian. The belief in the trinity is one of those core beliefs that describes a Christian, that is why mormons and Jehova's witnesses are not considered Christian, but an offshoot of Christianity.

That is too classic. You're not one to judge others, especially to tell them that they're not a Christian.

 

[ybbor]

That is too classic. You're not one to judge others, especially to tell them that they're not a Christian.

he can say they're not part of the orgnization of Chrsitians (not with the greateast authority though), just not that he isn't a follower of God.

 

[bhsup]

just out of curiosity, what do you think about the Holy Spirit?

Honestly, I don't really know for sure. It is that which helps me and guides me in my faith, helps me to understand scripture, and so forth. Admittedly, it's always confused me a bit.

I see, so sort of like an uber-angel?

Absolutely not. Angels, if you want to view things in a hierarchial fashion, are above humans here on earth, but below humans in heaven. Christ is the Son of God, not a creation of God. Well, I guess in one sense he's a creation, but I don't want to get that philosophical about it. He's God's son.

 

[Bill3000]

Which one? The American F-15, the Egyptian War Chariot, ....

Argh!! I just spammed my own thread!

Looking it more on wikipedia, it appears I'm sort of wrong. Historic Unitarians believed in the moral authority, but not the deity, of Jesus. However, your views still are non-trinitarian.

More wikipedia stuff!

Although most nontrinitarians identify themselves as Christian, many trinitarians disagree. Their counter-claim is that the doctrine of the Trinity is so central to the Christian faith that to deny it is to embrace a "different gospel" and to set onesself against the Church's account of its own history and identity, inasmuch as the gospel concerns who Jesus Christ is and what he did. Non-trinitarians who believe in the deity of Christ counter that theirs is the more historically orthodox position, since the doctrine of the trinity was not solidified until 325 CE, and thus it is not they who embraced a "different gospel". See also Great Apostasy. Others believe that the issue is not central, and a Christian can have one or the other belief without this affecting his or her position significantly.

Christianity is typically understood as tripartite Monotheism in its God-concept, although the theological and philosophical work needed to differentiate this from tritheism is significant. This difficulty is so great that non-Christians who make the attempt are often left with a view of Christianity as being a faith of tritheism or quadratheism when dealing with Roman Catholics and their focus on Mariology. This is not the case, when the Cappadocian Fathers developed the idea of Trinity, some scholars get the general sense that the developers of the trinity were themselves not entirely convinced of its truth. However, some framework was needed to reconcile the centrality of Jesus for the Christian experience with the figure of YHWH or "Abba" of which Jesus was a representative, the best option at that time was this trinity idea. In any discussion of early Christianity, it is important to remember that a small sect like Christianity needed to show itself as quantifiably different from that which came before and the surrounding culture in general. In order to accomplish this, a standard theology was needed. With this theology, the group could define itself and rally around a central cause or figure. This made the faith strong, but after the faith grew beyond the danger of being destroyed by Rome, it also made the faith somewhat myopic when it came to dissenting views.

Although some denominations require their members to profess faith in the trinity, most mainline denominations have taken a "hands-off" policy on the subject of the trinity, realizing that since personal study and free thought have been encouraged for years, it is not surprising that some of the conclusions reached would be nontrinitarian. The recognition here is that the trinity is tool for pointing to a greater truth. In other words, Christianity has historically sought to look beyond its docrtines (see Apophasis) to the greater truth they are intended to address, IE God. It is not uncommon for a Methodist, Presbyterian, or Anglican to profess non-trinitarian views, even among the clergy. The response from the governing bodies of those denominations is usually neutral, so long as the disagreement is voiced in respect.

 

[bhsup]

That is too classic. You're not one to judge others, especially to tell them that they're not a Christian.

Actually, I'd have to say Homie should and must have every right to say that if he wants. As long as he doesn't fry me on a spit over an open flame for disagreeing with him, I'm fine with him thinking that.