Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Am I a false Christian?
Message-ID: <4640@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 7-Apr-85 23:24:30 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.4640
Posted: Sun Apr  7 23:24:30 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 9-Apr-85 04:04:02 EST
References: <5398@utzoo.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 53

In article <5398@utzoo.UUCP> laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton) writes:
>There are people who claim to love everyone, but whose love seems pretty
>watered down to me -- compared to the love that I feel for the people I
>say that I love. I actually do not think that it is possible to feel this
>sort of profound love for everyone. But what sort of love dis Jesus mean?
>Moreover, what sort of actions are compatible with love? Did Jesus love
>the money changers he whipped out of the temple? as he was doing the
>whipping? If I got out a whip and set into my neighbours I would find it
>very hypocritical to call that love.

>you see the difficulties? Right now, as far as i know, most people who
>call themselves Christians condemn certain actions which other people
>who called themselves Christians did as ``non-Christian''. No doubt those
>people would or do disagree. How can any Christian be sure that he is not
>practicing a false Christianity, despite having all the best intentions in
>the world?

>I have yet to find any acceptable solution. This question bothered Soren
>Kierkegaard a lot, but, by and large, I have not found that it has bothered
>other theologians and philosophers who have assumed that because they were
>sincere that they were also correctly understanding what God wants of them.
>This particular belief bothers me a great deal.

This is a very important question, and in fact it does figure in modern
theology, though not in a very overt way.  FOr the moment, I will talk as if
I represent the liberal theology of (for instance) the Episcopal Church.

It is important to realize that we have no way of knowing exactly what the
demands of love are.  Our consciences are perverted by our evil, and thus
are not wholely trustworthy.

On the other hand, Paul seems to reject the notion that we must be fully
instructed by law.  Calvin gave three purposes for law, of which the second
is most important to this discussion.  First, one can use the law to see
that one is in fact a sinner.  Second, the law gives some indication of
what standards are demanded.  Third, the law restrains to some extent those
who have no stronger basis for their morality (Calvin means non-christians
here, but the principle generalizes in an obvious fashion).

Jesus is quite clear that the Jewish law can be considered to be incomplete,
in that there are actions demanded by love, but not by the law, and that
there are things permitted by the law, but not by love.  An important
illustration of this is in his teaching on divorce.  It is also evident that
he establishes little in the way of law (as a jew would recognize it).

I don't believe that any group of christians can sit down with a Bible and
write out The Law of Christ.  Love is simply much too situational, and there
is not a good enough oracle to rely on.  Most of the law people claim to
find in the scriptures, they are projecting there.

Sorry I can't give a simple answer: it's not a simple issue.

Charley Wingate  umcp-cs!mangoe