"Christian" Dogma in a Nutshell

From another thread, I stated this synopsis of "Christian" belief:

You don't understand; all people are total scum but Jesus gives this undeserving trash the "gift of grace". We all suck and are dirtbags, but those few who sufficiently grovel before God's greatness will be rewarded and the rest will get what their evil nature has earned.


Halitose claimed this is a "Strawman and a hasty generalization" but after reading many posts from various "Christians" here, I think it's a reasonable summary. The language might be harsh, but is there anything in there you "Christians" disagree with?

Originally posted by no1marauder
From another thread, I stated this synopsis of "Christian" belief:

You don't understand; all people are total scum but Jesus gives this undeserving trash the "gift of grace". We all suck and are dirtbags, but those few who sufficiently grovel before God's greatness will be rewarded and the rest will get what their evil nature has earned.


...[text shortened]... uage might be harsh, but is there anything in there you "Christians" disagree with?

I don't think you get a good representation of "Christian belief" in this forum. So I wouldn't call your summary a synopsis of "Christian belief", but rather of "beliefs of the most outspoken 'Christians' in the RHP Spirituality Forum". I believe they are a minority outside this forum, and they may even be a minority in this forum. They just shout louder.

Originally posted by no1marauder
From another thread, I stated this synopsis of "Christian" belief:

You don't understand; all people are total scum but Jesus gives this undeserving trash the "gift of grace". We all suck and are dirtbags, but those few who sufficiently grovel before God's greatness will be rewarded and the rest will get what their evil nature has earned.


...[text shortened]... uage might be harsh, but is there anything in there you "Christians" disagree with?

Yes, I disagree with your 'summary'.

Originally posted by no1marauder
From another thread, I stated this synopsis of "Christian" belief:

You don't understand; all people are total scum but Jesus gives this undeserving trash the "gift of grace". We all suck and are dirtbags, but those few who sufficiently grovel before God's greatness will be rewarded and the rest will get what their evil nature has earned.


uage might be harsh, but is there anything in there you "Christians" disagree with?

You don’t understand the first thing about Christianity. People are made in God’s image. This statement alone refutes your entire summary. Reap what you sow is another one. The fact that we are born with a sin nature does not devalue us, it means that the road back to God will be as easy or difficult as we make it.

I think this thread is more a summary of how you see Christians, or the world for that matter.

Originally posted by no1marauder
From another thread, I stated this synopsis of "Christian" belief:

You don't understand; all people are total scum but Jesus gives this undeserving trash the "gift of grace". We all suck and are dirtbags, but those few who sufficiently grovel before God's greatness will be rewarded and the rest will get what their evil nature has earned.


...[text shortened]... uage might be harsh, but is there anything in there you "Christians" disagree with?

Could you be more specific as to whom you are referring when you're talking about "Christians" ?

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Could you be more specific as to whom you are referring when you're talking about "Christians" ?

I would imagine that's quite clear, no?

Originally posted by Omnislash
Yes, I disagree with your 'summary'.

What part? Which of the statements are incorrect?

1) Man is "evil" "depraved" etc etc etc by nature;

2) Man doesn't merit salvation but it is given to him as an act of grace IF;

3) He believes that Jesus Christ is his Savior and Lord.


Not surprising that no "Christian" wants to actually address the points.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Could you be more specific as to whom you are referring when you're talking about "Christians" ?

Which of the three statements do you disagree with, Ivanhoe?

Originally posted by no1marauder
What part? Which of the statements are incorrect?

1) Man is "evil" "depraved" etc etc etc by nature;

2) Man doesn't merit salvation but it is given to him as an act of grace IF;

3) He believes that Jesus Christ is his Savior and Lord.


Not surprising that no "Christian" wants to actually address the points.

I don't know about ivanhoe, but I'm going to change the split of your statements (you'll see why):

1. Man is "evil" "depraved" etc etc etc by nature.
2. Man doesn't merit salvation but it is given to him as an act of grace.
3. Salvation is given to man as an act of grace if (and only if*) he believes that Jesus Christ is his Savior and Lord.

Of these, (1) is an incorrect representation of Christian doctrine with virtually all denominations.

(2) is correct wrt most denominations.

(3) is incorrect wrt the Catholic and Orthodox Churches (and maybe the High Anglicans). It is correct only wrt the sola fide Christians.

---
* The "only if" part has been inferred from your use of "if" in capitals.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Which of the three statements do you disagree with, Ivanhoe?

Please, answer my question.

Originally posted by no1marauder
The language might be harsh, but is there anything in there you "Christians" disagree with?

I tend to believe they object to the harsh language, as everything you've written is part of their doctrine.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
I don't know about ivanhoe, but I'm going to change the split of your statements (you'll see why):

1. Man is "evil" "depraved" etc etc etc by nature.
2. Man doesn't merit salvation but it is given to him as an act of grace.
3. Salvation is given to man as an act of grace if (and only if*) he believes that Jesus Christ is his Savior and Lord.

O ...[text shortened]... s.

---
* The "only if" part has been inferred from your use of "if" in capitals.

If man isn't evil by nature, why does he need salvation at all?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
I don't know about ivanhoe, but I'm going to change the split of your statements (you'll see why):

1. Man is "evil" "depraved" etc etc etc by nature.
2. Man doesn't merit salvation but it is given to him as an act of grace.
3. Salvation is given to man as an act of grace if (and only if*) he believes that Jesus Christ is his Savior and Lord.

O ...[text shortened]... s.

---
* The "only if" part has been inferred from your use of "if" in capitals.

Of these, (1) is an incorrect representation of Christian doctrine with virtually all denominations.

At least since Calvin’s doctrine of “total depravity” (and perhaps in Luther in his “worse” moments—and I seem to recall some pretty strong language in the Augsburg Confession) this representation has deeply and broadly infected Protestantism. Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Anglicanism (except for the very Protestant wing) don’t seem to display it much; Lutherans are a mixed bag.

(2) is correct wrt most denominations.

I agree, but the question remains: Does humanity “merit” by nature eternal condemnation/punishment (I know there are differing views here on what condemnation means)—either, say, to appease God’s wrath (Luther?) or God’s demand for “justice,” or under any other theory?

(3) is incorrect wrt the Catholic and Orthodox Churches (and maybe the High Anglicans). It is correct only wrt the sola fide Christians.

I might also ask if some Protestants have a greater tendency to equate faith and “belief” in such a way as their position seems to be sometimes “think right and be saved.” It has seemed that way to me.

The only other note I want to make here is that, in the States, the distinction between High/Low Anglicans (Episcopalians) is not identical to the more-Protestant/more-Catholic distinction.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Please, answer my question.

I guess that's what we're finding out. I would say that of the people on this site at least RBHILL, blindfaith101, KellyJay and others have made statements that encompass all three premises (they may correct me if they believe I have misstated their position). Coletti firmly believes in 1 and 2 but his predestination position precludes 3 (which is mostly an Evangelical, Born Again position as I understand it).

Will you please answer my question now??

Originally posted by lucifershammer
I don't know about ivanhoe, but I'm going to change the split of your statements (you'll see why):

1. Man is "evil" "depraved" etc etc etc by nature.
2. Man doesn't merit salvation but it is given to him as an act of grace.
3. Salvation is given to man as an act of grace if (and only if*) he believes that Jesus Christ is his Savior and Lord.

O ...[text shortened]... s.

---
* The "only if" part has been inferred from your use of "if" in capitals.

I think you are dead wrong about 1 being rejected by "virtually all denominations" as Vistesd points out. I also think it is embraced by some sections of the RCC as well; I'll see if I can find links.

Your comments about 2 and 3 seem about right. I don't object to your restatement.