Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: credmond@watmath.waterloo.edu (Chris Redmond) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Christian view of homosexuality Message-ID: Date: 10 Jul 90 07:40:09 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Waterloo Lines: 50 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article tp0x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Thomas Carl Price) writes: >The core of Christianity is not the teachings of Jesus but the identity of >Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of God, the Savior promised to Adam and >Eve in Genesis 3:15, to Abraham, to David, and so forth. Paul's writings >are (with the rest of the epistles) an elaboration of this role, after the >fact, and instructions for the formation of ecclesias. >Of course, if you don't think that all the bible was inspired, but that >Paul just wrote down a lot of good ideas he had, then the above won't make >so much sense. Of course, if you don't think that all the bible was inspired, >you might as well be Zen Buddhist -- and I mean that sincerely. Sorry to quote almost the full message, but it seems necessary in order for me to make my point. I consider myself a Christian, and I do not agree with any part of this statement. Nor do I think that I might as well be Zen Buddhist; if I were, I would lose the truths that God is offering me through Christianity. In particular, I do not believe that "the core of Christianity" is some theological formulation about the "identity" of Jesus. I believe that the core of Christianity is the message which Jesus brought, and expressed in his teachings. Of course his teachings are more meaty and complex than the vague "love and good feelings" to which some people have tried to reduce them. Let's not get into another fruitless argument about whether the Bible is inspired (let alone about what "inspired" means), but let's also not make the mistake of thinking that all Christians believe the same things and express them in the same way! CAR credmond@watmath [Traditionally Christianity has based itself on *both* the teachings *of* Jesus and the teachings *about* Jesus. The teachings of Jesus are the things he preaching in the ministry while he was alive. The teachings about him involve such things as why he died, how his death and resurrection save us, etc. The things about him are consistent with what he said about himself, but certainly go beyond it. The most common theory is that he couldn't have taught in any detail about the meaning of his death and resurrection before they happened because nobody would have known what he was talking about. I think it's a mistake to try to remove either of these components from Christianity. Without the teachings of Jesus, it becomes sort of a mystery religion: much of the meat of what it means to live a Christian life is in the Sermon on the Mount, the parables, etc. Without the teachings about Jesus, it becomes a society for ethical enlightenment, without the salvation that comes through Christ's atonement. I hate to see these two aspects of Christianity made into competitors, as these two messages seem to be doing. --clh]