Are you a Christian If......

[Stephen Fox]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/opini ... ss&emc=rss

If William Thornton will as an example read the above and then go to Barnes and Noble and Read Marilynne Robinson's chapter Memory in the Givenness of Things, and Jerry Vines were to read his Review on the Thornton Blog--Vines has chimed in before--then maybe Vines will say he was wrong to participate in the fundamentalist takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention before he dies, but I doubt it.

Even so Thornton should take up the challenge, especially the Robinson Memory part.

[William Thornton]

Give me a link to the B & N Robinson chapter.

Vines is a Christian. I am a Christian. Are you making a point here or just stray links?

[Stephen Fox]

An essay in Robinson's the Givenness of things. The Essay Memory. It is not online. You have to read the Chapter at Barnes and Noble though the Library in Winder if up to snuff should have a copy.

You know how I feel about Vines. I'm not gonna say he is not going to heaven when he dies; you know I find his fundamentalism suspect as it is a brand of the faith, a malfunction only about 150 years old.

Robinson will help you add depth to your thinking on the Wash Post point. It would be remarkable indeed if Vines were to engage the task and react to both the link in this thread and to Robinson.

I am hoping your response will show more curiousity, more breadth than what I suspect his predictable reply will be

[William Thornton]

Hope you had a nice Christmas stephen.

[KeithE]

Stephen,
Good article!
Just happened into my nearest B&N this morning; Robinson's Givennesss of Things was not there. Could you summarize her points?

But I have to tell you that the Takeover (or fracturing or whatever you want to call it) of the SBC is not the major dividing point of Christendom. But it is indicative of a major longstanding division of Christian thought - creedal/doctrinal matters vs social gospel/Kingdom progress. That division comes through in your link (Tim Keller's answers to Nicholas Kristof questions).

William,
Suggest you READ Stephen link's to meaningful discuss the thoughts therein (and not just give your instant {7 minutes} defensive reaction). It is more than a "stray link”.

----------------------------------

At stake, Is Christianity a set of doctrines (that Jesus did not even bring up) or is it following (1) Jesus’s lead in helping the poor, sick, hungry, and otherwise marginalized people, (2) His example of non-retaliation and peace making, and (3) His sublime teaching for living?

Kristof asks, Can one be a follower of Christ and not believe in the Virgin Birth or the Resurrection or Miracles. If one's fundamental (no pun intended) discriminant between Christian and Non-Christian, is whether or not the bible is inerrant, then I guess one must side with Keller since the Virgin Birth and The Resurrection and Miracles are mentioned in the bible (though not as prominently as exhortation to live a life of love towards all). The trouble is (whether or not you can accept it) that the bible is not inerrant. Read .

Keller’s defense is to say if one does not believe in the Virgin Birth, etc., the whole of Christianity is becomes “destabilized”. Non-sense. If one does not follow Jesus’s charge to love all, help the poor, feed the hungry, etc., that is what brings Jesus’s whole point down to rubble. Focus on doctrinal points is what has destabilized Christendom and fractured it into a thousand pieces. The Spirit that I know, brings me to help others, not once to some doctrinal point (detailed study can lead to some doctrinal points and that is interesting; but that is far from any life giving impetus).

For the record, I do think (but not totally certain) that the Virgin birth and Resurrection and miracles are true. Mary “treasured things things in her heart" in speaking about the events surrounding Jesus’s birth. She should know and she was in a position to inform the early church. I judge that Jesus’s did rise from the dead (fairly certain of this), the chief evidence is not just the claims in the bible, but the birth of the church amidst a disheartened set of Jesus’s followers. There are no ancient source denying it (that I'm aware of and I've looked) when both the Jewish religious and Roman authorities had even reason to claim otherwise. Another point for the physical Resurrection as Keller brings up in the link above, is why would the church say women (not considered a reliable witness) discovered the empty grave. I believe that this news spread rapidly verbally. As for miracles, life and earth itself is a miracle as far as I’m concerned, so I do not have that built-in bias that any purported miracle must be false. I’m more certain that miracles have occurred than I am Jesus was born of a virgin. If miracles are simply written off, then of course the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection are impossible.

bears witness to one who is following Christ in making the world a better place. And in this link he says that he admires Jesus’s teaching. Who am I to say he is not a Christ follower as Keller implies.

While disavows the social gospel, he does support giving to the poor and urban improvement.

Essentially I have no problem that people have some set of doctrines (I do myself). But I do have a problem when those same people decry those who think other than they do and declare them unChristian when that is not the thrust of Jesus’s teaching at all.

And this link was a cordial discussion.

[Stephen Fox]

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/ ... son-review

Keith, its in the essays. If it is in B and N in Rome Ga it should be in Huntsville. Don't be too proud to ask for assistance and be sure you spell her last name right, Robinson.

[KeithE]

[Haruo]

Library?