Another Fundamental to Question...

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Grumpy alert,,

about reading a book by Spong, I might, could I suppose, but I have a number of books I think I would rather read first. In truth I am a bit put off by responses to a straingforward question which reply read such and such.

I didn't mean to cop out there, but I also don't feel quite comfortable trying to answer those questions for Bishop Spong. It's been a while since I read the book myself, and the most I really feel sure about saying is that he doesn't hate Christianity, he simply disagrees with the literal and fundamental interpretation of it.

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Huck, you said:

On the other hand to my view the atonement is one of the few redeeming quality Christianity has. Pain in the ass without it.
I think I actually would prefer Greatful Dead to Christianity without atonement. With it I can see value in both.

You say that after saying you question much of Christian doctrine. Interesting, what else is there worthy of question? Possibly, baptism?? I'm too old to have listened to the "Greatful Dead"... Wha'd they say profound?

I think You might have more in common with Spong than you think... He too embraces resurection & a next-life. That's where he & i diverge. Life ain't no "...pain-in-the-ass..." for me :-) I don't need another "life"...this one has been great! Most of my life i simply went along with the fluff. Why not, eh?

But for the last 20+/- years i have looked at that concept rationally, logistically, & from MY spiritual/psyche perspective. In doing so i conclude there is no evidence or rational thought that justifies such a belief. Other than tradition dating back to primitive cultures that even influenced the sophisticated Egyptians and of course the 12 Tribes from which Christianism grew.

That break-away group expected "THE EVENT" to be emminent & momentary... Many still do... Be that as it is. That particular tenet should have no bearing on how one lives their life, and their interactions with others.

The "Cross" thing, which seems to disturb you, is a nothing more than symbolic. It was the common way of execution. The 'lethal-injection' of that time & place... IMSCO, it isn't what one "believes" that matters; it's how one lives their life that marks them as a good/not-good neighbor... Warm regards, Roger

As for books, most seem to have both high & low points. I too have a pile in front of me, a new one for Dad's-Day: "Healthy Aging". Gotta get into that one!!

[_Gazelam]

Spong believes in the resurrection, but he doesent believe in the Fall or Christ? The man is derranged.

[_Gazelam]

My using the recent news stories of Paris Hilton and illegal immigrants was to illustrate that there is a sence of justice that is universaly understood by everyone. When events like an open pourous border and a person of wealth buying their way out of trouble are seen, the universal reaction is to be outraged.


Christ is the Law (3 Nephi 15:9) meaning that he was the personification and embodiment of law; that acting in the power and authority of his Father he has given a law to all things (D&C 88:42); that he himself governs and is governed by law; that the Light of Christ is the "law by which all things are governed" (D&C 88:13); that it is he who gave the law of Moses, and the law of the gospel, and the laws of science, and all laws that ever have been or ever will be revealed.

All things are governed by law; nothing is exempt. In the eternal perspective there is no such thing as chance; in the divine economy the same invarying result always flows from the same cause. These principles are immutable, eternal, everlasting; they apply to all things both temporal and spiritual. "Unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions." Christ "hath given a law unto all things, by which they move in their times and their seasons; and their courses are fixed, even the courses of the heavens and the earth, which comprehend the earth and all the planets." (D&C 88:38, 42-43)

Once a law has been ordained, it thereafter operates automatically; that is, whenever there is compliance with its terms and conditions, the promised results accrue. the law of gravitation is an obvious example. Simaliraly, compliance with the law of faith always brings the gift of the Spirit. By obedience to celestial law men automatically qualify for a celestial inheritance in eternity; by open rebellion against law, they automatically assure themselves of a place in a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory. (D&C 88:21-34.)

Christ took upon himself the punishment for the shortcomings of all those who take upon themselves his name in the waters of baptism; and who sought diligently to comply with the bounds of the covenant they had made. The law must be satisfied, and God in his mercy has made it possible for us to inherit celestial glory.

Obedience to Gods laws teach us to share in the culture of heaven while in this life, prepareing us to share in the Celestial kingdom in the eternities.

[_Roger Morrison]

Spong believes in the resurrection, but he doesent believe in the Fall or Christ? The man is derranged.

Gaz, just a quickie--Spong DOES BELIEVE IN Christ AS A MORTAL WHO GAVE HIS LIFE FOR HUMANITY--THAT WE MIGHT ABIDE THE "TWO NEW COMMANDMENTS"... "Derranged"??? LOL!!

More on yer other post later. Seems we might be on the same page of two editions of THE book... Different words similar meaning... Ya gotta git with the new stuff, Bro... :-) Warm regards, Roger

[_Gazelam]

Spong believes in the resurrection, but he doesent believe in the Fall or Christ? The man is derranged.

Gaz, just a quickie--Spong DOES BELIEVE IN Christ AS A MORTAL WHO GAVE HIS LIFE FOR HUMANITY--THAT WE MIGHT ABIDE THE "TWO NEW COMMANDMENTS"... "Derranged"??? LOL!!

More on yer other post later. Seems we might be on the same page of two editions of THE book... Different words similar meaning... Ya gotta git with the new stuff, Bro... :-) Warm regards, Roger

Roger, if Spong believed in Christ, he would believe in the Fall. Please explain to me how a person can believe in the resurrection, but deny the divinity of Christ.

And as far as new stuff goes, I don't want new, I want what Adam had.

[_huckelberry]

Roger, you wonder if the Greatful Dead had something profund to say. Not particularly. But that was part of my point.

You spend lot of years in church? live outside US? Perhaps over seventy? Well, not important, it is certainly possible to live without the Greatful Dead. They are not a required ticket for salvation or whatever.

Perhaps if you are unfamiliar you might have imagined the name was some sort of reference to life after death,a subject I hadn't mentioned but you are commenting about.

Myself I found an actual belief in life after death to be the last piece of Christian belief which came to have any meaning to me. I think it is easy to doubt. Relating it to my first comment I would say I would much rather have a Christian belief with an atonement and no life after death than a view of Chritianity with life after death and no atonement.

[_huckelberry]

What would I like to see new?

I am not the leading guide but I think it would help if these two ideas had more presence.

I see how true it is that God has no favorites but that in every nation the man who is godfearing and does what is right is acceptable to him.

Christian faith, church, is leaven for the loaf which will be worked through the whole world till it is all leavened.

Well those ideas are not new and I did not originate them.

I do not think the church is an exclusive club of the saved. Instead I understand that it is called to be a blessing to the whole world.

[_Roger Morrison]

Gaz, said:

Roger, if Spong believed in Christ, he would believe in the Fall. Please explain to me how a person can believe in the resurrection, but deny the divinity of Christ.

And as far as new stuff goes, I don't want new, I want what Adam had.

Please be patient with me Bro... I can't, "...explain how anybody can believe in the resurrection..." I can however offer my own sentiments concerning, "...belief in Christ...deny the divinity of Christ..." But first some definitions: Do you assume "Belief-in-Christ" to be the same as, "Believing the words/teachings of Christ"??

Not meaning to demean, or be trite, believing in 'Santa Claus' doesn't make him real--except to the child who believes. The child doesn't live a Santa-like life because of "belief-in". Nor do "believers-in" Jesus necessarily live a Christ-like life. However, simplistically--as we tend to be--I expect someone who Believes Christ's teachings--the Two New Commandments--will be more apt to Christ-like attempts at life than someone who simply believes the myths and legends... Do you know what i mean??? The philosopy being one thing, the science of living is another...

To believe--and apply--the teachings of Christ, as they refer to human behaviour, does not necessitate believing him to be divine. Such is a carry-over of the "wise" being of "God", while "fools" were not of "God"... Until Jesus taught them otherwise... Sort of like men of old believing in the Divine-Right-of-Kings. A most ridiculous, self-serving fallacy promolgated by Royalty to their subjects. As in some religions today...Only Leaders have Divine Rights...

You only have to know and do the words. We have evolved beyond ritualism. If all you want is what Adam had... You have it. Warm regards, Roger

[_Gazelam]

Like it says in Romans 2:11-15, there are plenty who live without ever hearing the law, and will be judged as righteous. They will of coarce still need to be baptised by proxy in the temple, and accept Christ as their redeemer and savior in order to fullfill all righteousness and meet the requirements of the Law.

Some live righteously by their nature, others need to be instructed. Everyone is strong in some area, but weak in another. The priesthood is there to seal and bind the Holy Ghost to a newly baptised believers soul, to help them to grow and to sanctify their actions.

Why is this so difficult for you to believe in?