It was a meeting where one would not normally say the Pledge (indeed, as most meetings are - isn't just about the only place where people routinely say the Pledge is in public schools?) and there was nervous laughter when someone brought up the idea. I see nothing unusual about that.
Although, as an anabaptist and Christian who believes the Bible teaches us to pledge allegiance only to God, I would not have taken part and would certainly have been condemned by many for my religious beliefs, so perhaps that skews my view.
Craig, Stan doesn't want me to post comments on his blogs anymore, so if you're looking for an answer from me to your question there, it won't happen there.
So, as to your question...
I've wondered for a while how folks identify orthopraxy without orthodoxy. I've asked the question, never gotten an answer.
... if it were addressed to me, I would say that we DO need good orthodoxy - good "right thinking" - in order to have good orthopraxy.
But there's orthodoxy and there's orthodoxy.
Let me posit a point and get your response:
One need not understand "GOD'S VIEW OF ATONEMENT" (if God has a view) in order to be a Christian or to live aright (orthopraxy).
Agreed?
One need not understand the Christian teaching of the Triune nature of God in order to be a Christian or to have good orthopraxy.
Agreed?
In the Bible, each and every time (that I can think of) they look for some measure of whether this or that person is "in" - is a Christian or a follower of God - they look to how the person in question is LIVING THEIR LIFE. Are they people of grace, love, kindness, gentleness? Do they display the fruit of the Spirit? Do they do what the "father" told them to do? Are they working with and for the "least of these?" Are they preaching the Good News to the poor?
Over and over in the Bible, we see this repeated. The followers of God are easily identified by the love of God lived out in their lives.
Agreed?
And can you think of even ONE instance of someone looking to a correct doctrinal stance on the Atonement, on the Virgin birth, on the Trinity, on the "inerrancy" of the Bible as a measure? Even ONE?
So, good orthodoxy DOES help lead to good orthopraxy, I think. But understanding various tenets of the Christian faith (especially those that aren't direct teachings of the Bible/Jesus) - THAT sort of orthodoxy - is not as a reliable measure of Christianity as the lives being lived, seems to me, especially given that we find only orthopraxy used as a measure in the Bible.
3 comments:
I don't get it.
It was a meeting where one would not normally say the Pledge (indeed, as most meetings are - isn't just about the only place where people routinely say the Pledge is in public schools?) and there was nervous laughter when someone brought up the idea. I see nothing unusual about that.
Although, as an anabaptist and Christian who believes the Bible teaches us to pledge allegiance only to God, I would not have taken part and would certainly have been condemned by many for my religious beliefs, so perhaps that skews my view.
Craig, Stan doesn't want me to post comments on his blogs anymore, so if you're looking for an answer from me to your question there, it won't happen there.
So, as to your question...
I've wondered for a while how folks identify orthopraxy without orthodoxy. I've asked the question, never gotten an answer.
... if it were addressed to me, I would say that we DO need good orthodoxy - good "right thinking" - in order to have good orthopraxy.
But there's orthodoxy and there's orthodoxy.
Let me posit a point and get your response:
One need not understand "GOD'S VIEW OF ATONEMENT" (if God has a view) in order to be a Christian or to live aright (orthopraxy).
Agreed?
One need not understand the Christian teaching of the Triune nature of God in order to be a Christian or to have good orthopraxy.
Agreed?
In the Bible, each and every time (that I can think of) they look for some measure of whether this or that person is "in" - is a Christian or a follower of God - they look to how the person in question is LIVING THEIR LIFE. Are they people of grace, love, kindness, gentleness? Do they display the fruit of the Spirit? Do they do what the "father" told them to do? Are they working with and for the "least of these?" Are they preaching the Good News to the poor?
Over and over in the Bible, we see this repeated. The followers of God are easily identified by the love of God lived out in their lives.
Agreed?
And can you think of even ONE instance of someone looking to a correct doctrinal stance on the Atonement, on the Virgin birth, on the Trinity, on the "inerrancy" of the Bible as a measure? Even ONE?
So, good orthodoxy DOES help lead to good orthopraxy, I think. But understanding various tenets of the Christian faith (especially those that aren't direct teachings of the Bible/Jesus) - THAT sort of orthodoxy - is not as a reliable measure of Christianity as the lives being lived, seems to me, especially given that we find only orthopraxy used as a measure in the Bible.
Craig, I'd be interested in seeing your thoughts on my latest post about "false teachers."
Post a Comment