Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AMA

I'm an evangelical Christian - ask me anything

620 replies

Insieme · 10/07/2018 21:11

I'm happy to answer questions, though I'm not interested if people just come on to be insulting.

I can only give my views and talk about what I believe - evangelicalism covers a broad spectrum of beliefs and I can only speak for myself.

Ask away! Smile

OP posts:
Skyejuly · 27/07/2018 12:04

Thanks. I have Mary on my alter. :-)

MissConductUS · 27/07/2018 12:30

As do I. Smile

In my church we do a gender neutral liturgy. So we substitute God's for His. "His Kingdom" becomes "God's Kingdom", etc. It's not mandatory but perfectly permissible in the Episcopal Church.

MissConductUS · 27/07/2018 13:30

Skye, I found Jane Schaberg's book very helpful in better understanding Mary's discipleship

Mary Madalene Understood

Lots of good sources here too:

Jesus' Female Disciples - the New Evidence

Madhairday · 27/07/2018 13:39

I always think of God as both male and female too. The ultimate non-binary Grin - but more that as we are made in the image of God, God cannot possibly be confined to 'he' at all times. God is in fact described as a mother at times in scripture. I try not to use too gender specific language in general, though had to in a book I've written as it was just clunky to keep saying 'God' and 'Godself' all the time. The flow of it necessated it.

Hello headinhands - great to see you. Hope you're well. You said this:

Do you think you deserve to die like Jesus. Do you think I deserve to die like Jesus. And should feel grateful that he did it.

I think the cross is so much bigger than that. I don't think it can always be tied down to each individual in that way (though I do think each individual, including myself, mess up all the time). It's more that looking across the whole scope of human history, we see the most insidious of evil. We see child abuse, we see women being used and abused and discarded, we see genocide and the most vile atrocities committed in the name of war. We see violence and murder. On a lower level but still insidious we see lies, jealousy, anger, pride, gossip - all the stuff that can actually wreck lives. On this overall narrative, we see Jesus dying a death which had to be so stark and extreme; he had to take the entirety of the weight of human sin and sheer evil on his shoulders. For God to simply shrug her shoulders and say ' ok, I'll just forgive and chill out', would not be affording any kind of honour to those affected by any of these actions - it would be letting it go instead of taking it full on and saying actually, I am sickened by this evil but I still love you so very much, so I'm going to do something - something huge and stark - to ensure that you can be forgiven.

For me it's more that the consequence of us falling short is death (not eternal torment in fire, simply death) but God longs to give eternal life to those who choose that. Therefore Jesus' death on the cross was not simply about penal atonement but also about victory over death; he demonstrated that death had lost its power and that we could live eternally in relationship with God if that was what we wished.

Sometimes the message of the cross is narrowed by the narrative of Christ dying for our sons. While that is one huge part there's so, so much more. His death was the ultimate emancipatory action, his life a beautiful demonstration of God's empathy, his resurrection a glorious showcasing of the hope we hold.

Madhairday · 27/07/2018 13:42

sins that should be, though he did die for our sons. And daughters. And us. SmileFlowers

MissConductUS · 27/07/2018 15:39

On a purely practical level, the reason Christianity didn't die out as just another small, obscure Jewish sect was because Jesus performed miracles that anyone from any background could understand. Healing the sick, changing water into wine, even raising the dead were all things that worked at two levels. First, they gave him authority as a great prophet, which got him noticed and talked about, leading up to the crucifixion. Second, they all taught deeper spiritual lessons about the abundance of God's love for us and the opportunity to turn away from sin and fear and live in harmony with each other and God.

He was executed for preaching without a police permit, but he did it in such a way that His followers could go forth and change the world.

headinhands · 27/07/2018 20:49

I'll ask again as no one has given me a clear answer. Do any of the full on evangelical Christians on this thread think I deserve to be physically punished in the way Jesus was.

MissConductUS · 27/07/2018 21:15

Do any of the full on evangelical Christians on this thread think I deserve to be physically punished in the way Jesus was.

Where on earth did that idea come from? The answer is "no".

Insieme · 27/07/2018 21:28

Headinhands the answer is no from me too.

No one deserves to die the way Jesus did. He bore the punishment for the sins of everyone who has ever lived or will ever live, potentially. So how much of that is my punishment, or how much is yours? Part of it, but a pretty small part!

And I believe that the 'punishment' for anyone who finally rejects Jesus is separation from God. That's what I think 'hell' is.

OP posts:
ItsHot · 27/07/2018 22:10

HeadinHands Haven't read the whole thread but whats the background to your idea you should be punished like Jesus?

LockedOutOfMN · 27/07/2018 22:13

Hi OP, what do you think of those who use their religion as an excuse for bigotry and homophobia, for example those who refuse to perform same sex weddings or abortions as part of their jobs?

Insieme · 27/07/2018 23:01

Locked out you are assuming they are using their religion as an excuse for bigotry. Maybe they actually hold that view sincerely, even reluctantly, as a result of their religion, rather than using it as an excuse?

In an earlier couple of answers, I've said that personally I think homosexual acts are against what God wants, but I am broadly in favour of gay marriage. That's because I think other people should have the freedom to act in a way that I don't personally agree with. I'm in favour of freedom.

Similarly, I said I would never have an abortion, but I'm glad that option is available to those who need it. I want other people to have that freedom.

So my response would be that if someone, for a reason of conscience, can't contemplate marrying a gay couple, or performing an abortion, they should have the freedom to refuse without being sued, insulted or maligned. Clearly, provision would have to be made for the marriage or abortion to be performed by someone else, but I don't think that restricts the freedom of the couple or woman involved.

In general, I think people should be free to act according to their consciences, and that we should respect each others' rights to disagree / think differently.

One of the reservations I had about supporting gay marriage is that I fear priests / ministers / imams etc may eventually be forced to perform ceremonies they fundamentally disagree with. That's removing their freedom. And why would anyone want to be married by someone who was unwilling? It's an attempt to remove the freedom to disagree.

OP posts:
FrancinePefko42 · 28/07/2018 09:02

Thank you for the clarity if your answers. I appreciate it.
My questions are regarding the "pre-fall" world.

  1. Do you believe that God's original intention was to place humans in a perfect world (Eden) where there was no death?
  2. Why did God create the Serpent knowing what it would do (tempt Eve and then Adam for going against God's wishes)
  3. What would the world be like today, if Adam & Eve had obeyed God and stayed away from the fruit of the tree of knowledge?
OutwiththeOutCrowd · 28/07/2018 10:12

In recent years, in the UK and other increasingly secular/multi-cultural countries, there have been a number of reports of Christian street preachers being arrested for ‘hate speech’. In the cases I have read about, the complainants have been gay people or Muslims.

I think it’s fair to say that the Bible is against homosexual activity and also suggests that it’s those who believe in Jesus as divine saviour who have chosen the ‘right’ narrative and other people – presumably including Muslims – are displeasing to God in their beliefs and practices and are excluded from entrance to heaven. So I don't think it can be said that the preachers are misrepresenting the contents of the Bible.

The preachers think they are merely passing on Biblical teaching with all the passion that's in their hearts and exercising their right to freedom of speech.

On the other hand, gay people and Muslims – and probably other groups too – are hearing a message that they feel diminishes and intimidates them.

It’s a clash of two principles – the right to express oneself freely versus the right to go about one’s business without feeling harassed or distressed.

So I wonder what you think about street preachers and whether they truly should have the freedom to say whatever they feel like saying in public, regardless of offence caused?

MissConductUS · 28/07/2018 12:05

In the US we have a clear legal and social priority for giving the maximum possible latitude for freedom of speech. It is not just a religous issue, it is also political, social and moral. Here are a few quotes on the topic from Louis Brandeis, one of our greatest Supreme Court Justices.

Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.

no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.

freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government.

As soon as you start silencing what some consider "hate speech" you've created a heckler's veto. That way lies tyranny.

headinhands · 28/07/2018 12:17

He bore the punishment for the sins of everyone who has ever lived or will ever live

So what do I deserve for my sin? If I rejected Jesus' sacrifice for me what punishment would be fair?

MissConductUS · 28/07/2018 12:26

If I rejected Jesus' sacrifice for me what punishment would be fair?

Lack of union with God.

You seem a bit obsessed with this question.

OutwiththeOutCrowd · 28/07/2018 12:56

Muslims revere Jesus - he is a beloved prophet within Islam - but in the Quran, the divine saviour narrative is vehemently rejected. Would Muslims also be punished by a lack of union with God, given that they are completely dedicated to submitting to his will as they see it?

Insieme · 28/07/2018 13:32

Outwiththeourcrowd I think street preachers should generally be allowed to preach freely, unless they are explicitly inciting violence or being personally threatening. Personally I'm not sure street preaching is effective, but I think people should be free to do it.

So I think it's fine to say 'the Bible says Jesus is the only way to God', which Muslims / atheists / all manner of people might find 'offensive' in that they disagree with it. But that's not hate speech. Just because people disagree doesn't mean he can't say it. Saying something uncomfortable is not harassment.

I think it's ok for a street preacher to point out that God says sex outside marriage is wrong, including homosexual sex. Just because someone walking past is gay, or living with a heterosexual partner, doesn't mean the preacher shouldn't be allowed to say it. None of us has the right to prevent free speech merely because we disagree, or even because we feel uncomfortable.

However, if he said 'gay people should be killed' that's plainly threatening and is both wrong and illegal.

This is the sort of case that anyone who cares about free speech should worry about:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/05/preacher-locked-hate-crime-quoting-bible-gay-teenager/

While I can't know all the details of the case, this seems like something the police should not be arresting people for.

OP posts:
SegmentationFault · 28/07/2018 13:34

But there isn't always someone else to perform the marriage, or the abortion. What if the only pharmacist in a rural pharmacy refuses to dispense the morning after pill? Or the only staff member in a shop refuses to sell alcohol? Or the case of Kim Davis in the US, who refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples, meaning no ss couples in the county could get married?

Insieme · 28/07/2018 13:40

Outwiththeoutcrowd said

Muslims revere Jesus - he is a beloved prophet within Islam - but in the Quran, the divine saviour narrative is vehemently rejected.

Jesus claimed explicitly to be the son of God, and so was divine. He also said he was the only way to God. So while Muslims might revere Jesus, they would reject his divinity.

Can a Muslim say he believes Jesus is 'the way, the truth and the life'? Can he agree that 'no one comes to the Father except by me (Jesus)'? I would suspect not, but it's not for me to say. That's between the individual and God.

OP posts:
SegmentationFault · 28/07/2018 13:56

I agree that Lamour shouldn't have been arrested but I doubt it's a regular occurrence in the UK. I see people handing out leaflets and those depressing little comics all the time, and none of them have been lifted.

MissConductUS · 28/07/2018 14:02

What if the only pharmacist in a rural pharmacy refuses to dispense the morning after pill?

The morning after pill is sold over the counter. All you need to do is take it to the cashier and pay for it.

Or the only staff member in a shop refuses to sell alcohol?

You find another shop or head to the pub. There is no right to alcohol anywhere you want it.

Or the case of Kim Davis in the US, who refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples, meaning no ss couples in the county could get married?

Davis went to jail for contempt of court and other clerks in the office issued the licenses without an issue. The law was subsequently changed to not require her signature.

Bit of a tempest in a teapot.

headinhands · 28/07/2018 14:02

Lack of union with God

So why did Jesus need to die?

headinhands · 28/07/2018 14:03

You seem a bit obsessed with this question.

Why would my level of interest matter?

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread