|
I generally agree with both filtherton and roachboy. My experiences with Christianity have been much like filtherton's, and roachboy's assertion that taking the bible literally is idiotic is the very reason why. When I was a child, Hell was a place, but as I got older it was understood as a metaphor for separation from God. When I was a child, Heaven was a place, but as I got older it was understood as a metaphor for unification with God. Whatever God is. And so the Bible says the only way to the father is through Jesus...through his what? Through saying words, "I believe in Jesus Christ as my personal lord and savior," or through his teachings? If through his teachings - which I find to be the more compelling argument - then what about similar teachings? Seems to me that since most people didn't know about those similar teachings where Jesus was, it makes sense to focus on his own (assuming Jesus even knew about them). Speaking of assumptions, that's assuming he even actually said that. That statement is from the gospel of John, which creates an entirely different characterization of Jesus from the other 3 gospels. John's Jesus is self-assured and in total control...far different from the characterization that Jesus gets in Mark. John was also probably written after the other 3 gospels, and certainly written for a different audience. It is likely that that is simply the kind of thing John's audience needed to hear from Jesus. Mark, on the other hand, was written around the time of the destruction of the Jewish Temple, and you can see it in his characterization of Jesus. Jesus isn't powerful like in John...he is serene, and a victim...and Mark ends with no resurrection (it was added in later).
And what's this salvation prayer? Maybe it's just an evangelical thing, but I've never heard of it during my Catholic upbringing, and certainly not as any sort of requirement. I also asked onodrim, who was raised in a conservative Lutheran home - but also not evangelical - if she knew anything about it, and she had never heard of it. This brings me to what I think is ultimately the most important point regarding your (abaya's) views on Christianity and what is required to be Christian. You list off all these denominations that you participated in, but list requirements such as the salvation prayer and evangelism as a common thread throughout. It is for reasons like this that I think evangelicalism actually supersedes any other denomination, because evangelicalism is a particular method of thought which informs all other beliefs. Take out the evangelicalism, and any one of those denominations can be entirely different. In short, despite participating in these denominations, I would classify your Christian experience as being only one denomination: evangelical.
Based on how many different forms of already accepted Christianity are out there, not to mention the people who call themselves Christian who may not be accepted as such by others, I find no compelling argument that one must believe in Hell - or much else for that matter - in order to follow the teachings of Jesus, and therefore be "Christian."
__________________
Le temps détruit tout
"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling
|