CHRISTIAN FIGHT!!!

[Flagg]

Fox10 Phoenix
Just an FYI: Watch the video if you love how goddamned stupid ads for local news "teams" are. Otherwise you can skip the video and just read the text.

Faith fight: Churches at odds over teachings

Posted: May 13, 2015 3:21 PM PDT
Updated: May 13, 2015 5:27 PM PDT
By Linda Williams, FOX 10 News

FOUNTAIN HILLS, Ariz. - Call it a faith fight: religion is at the center of a controversy brewing in Fountain Hills. It seems some traditional Christian churches are at odds with what's being labeled as "Progressive Christianity."

That community is known for stunning scenery, retirees and high-end homes -- religion took center stage when banners started showing up Tuesday on eight traditional Christian churches in the area.

The banners promote a series of special sermons that start on Sunday named "Progressive Christianity: Fact or Fiction."

"And when you have an effort collaborated by multiple churches in one community to try to discredit one other way of thinking, that's when it becomes alarming," said Rev. David Felten, head of The Fountains Progressive Christian Church.

The Fountains is the only progressive church in Fountain Hills and Felten says it offers an option to biblical Christianity.

"That lets people know there's a choice out there, they don't have to deny science, they don't have to hate their gay neighbor, they don't have to read and take the bible in a way that causes them to abandon their rational mind," he said.

Just down the street from The Fountains, is the Fountain Hills Presbyterian Church. Rev. Bill Good acknowledges the coming Sunday messages are meant to push back against the progressive Christian movement.

"Frankly, we think progressive Christianity is misleading a lot of people," he said. "There are some half-truths and untruths coming out and that are not helpful to folks that are trying to find their way to Jesus Christ."

Good says this is the first time this many churches have joined together: Lutheran, Baptist, Presbyterian -- all to send out and share the same message about biblical Christianity and talk about how it's different from progressive Christianity.

Felten says this is merely a way for them to tear down the progressive view of Christianity.

The series starts Sunday and runs through June 28th at various Fountain Hills churches.

Christian teachings not full of hate for homosexuals, other faiths, and that believe in SCIENCE!?!?
We must band together and destroy them! That's not evil, either! After all, THAT'S WHAT JESUS WOULD DO!
I mean what's next? Gay marriage and women ministers?

[General Zod]

This is the sort of thing that leads to holy wars and crusades and jihads.

[Flagg]

This is the sort of thing that leads to holy wars and crusades and jihads.

Yeah. It would be just TERRIBLE. For real. Chick Fil A and Starbucks being bombed and then bombed again in reprisals. The last thing America needs, is a religious war on top of the fucking race war.

[jwl]

Oh, come on. This is not a civil war brewing, this is a bit of religious discontent in a few churches in a random village somewhere.

Also why are you on fox's website?

[The Romulan Republic]

This is the sort of thing that leads to holy wars and crusades and jihads.

Yeah. It would be just TERRIBLE. For real. Chick Fil A and Starbucks being bombed and then bombed again in reprisals. The last thing America needs, is a religious war on top of the fucking race war.

Their is no "race war" in America. Thank you for given validation to fear mongers and racists, ass hole. Yes, their is racism. That does not equal a "race war", which is a term that can only serve to breed fear, hatred, and violence towards other races.

[Terralthra]

You realize that, much like the term "class warfare", race war doesn't necessarily refer to large scale violence, right?

[The Romulan Republic]

Perhaps, but that's what a lot of people will think when they hear it.

Frankly, when I hear the term "race war", I think of the shit white supremacists spout off, because that's who I've seen associated with that term in the past.

[Adam Reynolds]

Oh, come on. This is not a civil war brewing, this is a bit of religious discontent in a few churches in a random village somewhere.

Also why are you on fox's website?

It's a local Fox news affiliate, not the national Fox News.

[Elheru Aran]

I'm not too surprised. I visit a nondenominational church (mostly due to my wife, who has more religion than I do), and it would definitely fall under the 'progressive' definition. There's a lot of flack out there for the newer churches that don't ask that everybody stick so strictly to the rules. This has been going on for a little while now, it's just not been in the public eye all that much. Go to any conservative church on Sunday and odds are you'll hear the pastor rant at some point during the sermon about how "some other churches" or "some so-called Christians" are "saying they love gays/addicts/whatever" or worse, "they actually drink beer!"

[TheHammer]

I'm not too surprised. I visit a nondenominational church (mostly due to my wife, who has more religion than I do), and it would definitely fall under the 'progressive' definition. There's a lot of flack out there for the newer churches that don't ask that everybody stick so strictly to the rules. This has been going on for a little while now, it's just not been in the public eye all that much. Go to any conservative church on Sunday and odds are you'll hear the pastor rant at some point during the sermon about how "some other churches" or "some so-called Christians" are "saying they love gays/addicts/whatever" or worse, "they actually drink beer!"

There is a trend in some of these churches to stay specific to the teachings of Christ - not to the bible as a whole, so that in that sense they are actually more Christian than many others who thump their Old Testament bibles.

Essentially, its the same thing Thomas Jefferson did with his "Life and Morals of Jesus" aka the Jefferson Bible.

[Elheru Aran]

I'm not too surprised. I visit a nondenominational church (mostly due to my wife, who has more religion than I do), and it would definitely fall under the 'progressive' definition. There's a lot of flack out there for the newer churches that don't ask that everybody stick so strictly to the rules. This has been going on for a little while now, it's just not been in the public eye all that much. Go to any conservative church on Sunday and odds are you'll hear the pastor rant at some point during the sermon about how "some other churches" or "some so-called Christians" are "saying they love gays/addicts/whatever" or worse, "they actually drink beer!"

There is a trend in some of these churches to stay specific to the teachings of Christ - not to the bible as a whole, so that in that sense they are actually more Christian than many others who thump their Old Testament bibles.

Essentially, its the same thing Thomas Jefferson did with his "Life and Morals of Jesus" aka the Jefferson Bible.

That's one way to look at it, although there's a lot of theology derived from the Epistles section of the NT, but with a little less focus on the more controversial aspects like Paul saying women shouldn't preach and what not.

When you get down to brass tacks though the difference is not so much about doctrine; ultimately that's largely similar between the two. The real difference is that the more conservative strains of Christianity *insist* that you adopt their social patterns and culture, and make the church an integral part of your daily life to the point where your life essentially revolves around it outside of work and family. Your music is Christian, your news are Christian or conservative, your Facebook feed is Christian and conservative, and of course you can have non-Christian friends but you got to get 'em comin' in to hear the good news, y'all...

In contrast, more 'progressive' churches are far less conformist. They don't care what you wear to church (as long as you don't stink, and if you do, well, come in anyway, the message doesn't care), they don't really care what you do outside the church as long as it doesn't harm the message, they don't insist that you adopt their 'church culture' or whatever, you don't even have to be friends with people from the church (although that doesn't hurt), you can listen to whatever music you want and the pastor might share similar tastes as you do, and admit to it on stage. The idea is that the church is where you worship, where you learn more about what they believe, and the actual execution of the faith is up to you and your relationship with your deity.

[Elheru Aran]

An good example-- conservative Christians are far more likely to send their kids to private (almost always Christian) schools or to homeschool them. This in turn has the effect of indoctrinating their values and culture into their children. The general argument is that they can do a better job than public schools, but really it's all about exclusivity (in the negative usage of 'exclusive'). While some people in my church do the same thing, most of them use public school instead.

[TheHammer]

An good example-- conservative Christians are far more likely to send their kids to private (almost always Christian) schools or to homeschool them. This in turn has the effect of indoctrinating their values and culture into their children. The general argument is that they can do a better job than public schools, but really it's all about exclusivity (in the negative usage of 'exclusive'). While some people in my church do the same thing, most of them use public school instead.

Well the argument that they do a better job than public schools (in the US anyway) is a valid one - but I think that probably reflects more on the state of American Public schools .

[General Zod]

An good example-- conservative Christians are far more likely to send their kids to private (almost always Christian) schools or to homeschool them. This in turn has the effect of indoctrinating their values and culture into their children. The general argument is that they can do a better job than public schools, but really it's all about exclusivity (in the negative usage of 'exclusive'). While some people in my church do the same thing, most of them use public school instead.

Well the argument that they do a better job than public schools (in the US anyway) is a valid one - but I think that probably reflects more on the state of American Public schools .

Turns out when you have an adequate budget, full staff and modern equipment you can get decent results?

[Edi]

This is the sort of thing that leads to holy wars and crusades and jihads.

Yeah. It would be just TERRIBLE. For real. Chick Fil A and Starbucks being bombed and then bombed again in reprisals. The last thing America needs, is a religious war on top of the fucking race war.

Their is no "race war" in America. Thank you for given validation to fear mongers and racists, ass hole. Yes, their is racism. That does not equal a "race war", which is a term that can only serve to breed fear, hatred, and violence towards other races.

The term "race war" in American discourse typically appears any time actual racists are ever confronted with an article that tries to bring attention to the problem of racism in America, in which case they cry that the person doing so is trying to incite a race war against white people. Of course, their objective is to silence any dissent and to deflect attention from their own privileged position. It is very much analogous to how Republicans use the term "class warfare": Anyone trying to call for accountability and an end to inequality is a communist trying to incite "class warfare", when it is the goddamn 1% that has been very successful at waging it against the lower classes.

So yes, race war is actually a term that can be easily used and can well be applicable given this context. That you are too fucking stupid to understand that bit and are even oblivious to its existence does you no credit.

[Block]

Edi, race war is only used in the US by lunatics like the Aryan Nation and whatever their minority equivalents are. People typically call it race baiting when they feel like people are just trying to involve race to strengthen their position.

[Channel72]

Calm down Flagg, he's not accusing you of being a white supremacist... Jesus Christ SDN ....

There is a trend in some of these churches to stay specific to the teachings of Christ - not to the bible as a whole, so that in that sense they are actually more Christian than many others who thump their Old Testament bibles.

Meh... it depends. Evangelical churches tend to follow the Lutheran tradition of defending anything Scripture says, regardless of how insane it is. Anyway, the annoying problem with Jesus Christ is that at the core of all his feel-good, peace-loving love-thy-neighbor sayings is a completely insane, radical eschatology that basically amounts to the idea that the world is ending imminently - and anyone who doesn't believe that the Hebrew God of the Old Testament self-incarnated on Earth and then committed suicide on Earth in order to satisfy a Levitical contract with mankind is doomed to eternal punishment. (This, of course happened after the rectification of the Vuldranai, wherein Jesus Christ appeared in the form of a giant Slor).

The hilarious thing is that unlike Scientology, Evangelical churches don't really try to hide the insane shit underneath their superficially harmless theology.

[Edi]

Edi, race war is only used in the US by lunatics like the Aryan Nation and whatever their minority equivalents are. People typically call it race baiting when they feel like people are just trying to involve race to strengthen their position.

Yeah, that's even more common, but I've run into the common usage of "race war" even from people who wouldn't be caught dead associating with groups like the Aryan Nation and other such assholes. So definitely not restricted to them.

[SCRawl]

Flagg and others, this worthless tangent has been split, and is over. Grow a layer of skin and get over yourselves.

[cmdrjones]

This entire thread reminds me of a bunch of blind men describing an elephant... LOL

[Flagg]

This entire thread reminds me of a bunch of blind men describing an elephant... LOL

That's because all of the posts I made explaining how the whole "religious/race war" thing was a joke, but for some reason it's been HoS'd.

[cmdrjones]

This entire thread reminds me of a bunch of blind men describing an elephant... LOL

That's because all of the posts I made explaining how the whole "religious/race war" thing was a joke, but for some reason it's been HoS'd.

Imagine that we replace the word "christian" with Basketball player. Then we trace the development of Basketball in america to the point that it gets poular enough that in more than one city we have groups playing it. Then they start forming local and city teams. Then somebody comes along and decides to have a conference to set down the rules of basketball and there is a large conference (of basketball team leaders) to decide what those rules are. There is a vote, and it is decided.
Later on, some people notice there were regional or local rules that were left out of the finalized version of basketball and that these obsolete or irrelevant rules are no longer used, mostly.... Sometime later, some groups begin to question the orignial conference and several more are called to explain or clarify this or that rule or answer pertinent questions.

Even LATER, some people decide that they want to make their OWN versions of basketball or revive some older regional sets of rules. Of course, the NBA disavows these hereti--- I mean hoodlums.

Now, if I try out for the LA lakers and I don't make the cut, or I don't agree with the set of rules that determins "who is and is NOT an LA Laker" can I BE an LA Laker by putting on the Jersey and proclaiming myself one? WHat if I start a team in Boise and CALL it the LA Lakers? How long do I have to call myself an LA Laker before I AM one? How many people do I have to get to agree that I AM an LA Laker before I can be one for real? What if I get a retired LA Laker to sponsor my Boise team? Or Former fans? Or if I buy some merchandise? Or get some old rulebooks? How about a signed basketball?

See where I am going with this?

[Raw Shark]

Straight to a bad analogy? These guys aren't trying to rip off the logo of another team, they're trying to be a different league with different rules playing the same sport.

[cmdrjones]

Straight to a bad analogy? These guys aren't trying to rip off the logo of another team, they're trying to be a different league with different rules playing the same sport.

The team name is "Christians"
The sport is "Christianity" (basketball) but if you are playing it with your feet and a team of 35 and the hoop is vertical, is it (Basketball) anymore?

[Elheru Aran]

Straight to a bad analogy? These guys aren't trying to rip off the logo of another team, they're trying to be a different league with different rules playing the same sport.

The team name is "Christians"
The sport is "Christianity" (basketball) but if you are playing it with your feet and a team of 35 and the hoop is vertical, is it (Basketball) anymore?

The difference is not as marked as you're trying to portray it.

The fundamental rules are largely in the Bible, and everybody accepts that to a greater or lesser degree. Salvation by Christ is *always* a core value. Proselyting, community worship, and social relationships between believers are always part of their belief structure. Even in the black-suit KJV bible-beater churches, they'll usually still welcome guests that aren't fitting the mold, because how do you think they get new members?

The only real difference (what distinguishes progressive/liberal from conservative) is which part of the Bible they stick by and how much interpretation is involved to fit the message they want to send.

Conservative Christians tend to promote following the *whole* Bible-- Old through New Testament, Gospels and Epistles, Revelation-- with minimal interpretation (follow it as written, except that part about pork, cause ain't nobody takin' away our good BBQ'ing).

Progressive/liberal Christians will typically focus on the Gospels and Epistles to the point where some churches label themselves as "New Testament believers". They also engage in a fair degree of interpretation; for example, "the bit where Paul says where he doesn't permit women to speak in worship, well, that's just Paul being sexist, it's totally okay by *us*". Or "We're OK with gay people coming to church, hell the more the merrier"-- though most churches are still pretty bent against gay marriage or allowing gay people to actually lead various positions in the church administration, cause there's a fine line still, in their beliefs.

Essentially: They're not so ridiculously different. They have the same general goals and same fundamental beliefs. The primary differences are a matter of application.