Introduction One of the most potentially divisive doctrinal debates in the history of the church centers on the opposing doctrines of salvation known as Calvinism and Arminianism. All Evangelical Theologians agree that biblical doctrine is the most important, foundational doctrine of Christianity. Yet these same Evangelical Theologians have disagreed for centuries concerning the doctrines of Calvinism and Arminianism. In recent times there seems to be a great apathy and lackadaisicalness between the two. It is time they bring this doctrine out of the closet and back to the forefront and dust it off and once again research, discuss and come together with a resolution to the conflict in the theology of salvation.
Contextualization of Christian Worldview: Christ and Culture: Niebuhr vs. Yoder Introduction The next two modules address key issues in attempting to be in yet not of the world in the exercise of Christian discipleship in secular societies and cultures. The context of the discussion revolves around H. Richard Niebuhr's articulation of and responses to the challenges of balancing Christ and Culture. What Niebuhr called the "enduring problem" is perhaps more pronounced than ever before in these days of great diversity and increased interactions and conflicts of postmodern global cultures. The problem is involved in relations between loyalties to Christ and culture, church and state, faith and reason...[and] how the assumptions, values, perceptions, and understandings of society penetrate us and influence our understanding of who Christ is, what it means to follow him, and what the mission of the church is. (Stassen, Yeager, & Yoder, 1996, p. 10) Module 4 consists of a clear presentation of the teleological ethical perspective of Niebuhr, as well as his classical typology (and examples from church history) of distinct responses to the enduring problem of how Christians can or should live in a fallen world.
“God has given the people His Word, and He expects us to obey it, with our leaders first practicing and setting examples for others. But after a period of time, the Christian leaders and the people of God have divided themselves and are gradually declining and filtering in many new doctrines/religions while not realizing that many lives are being destroyed in the process. Our Lord has a covenant, and it still applies to us today through Jesus Christ. The kingdom of Judah did turn to idols, disobeyed the Lord, and continuously invited His chastening. And today, instead of being a blessing to all of the earth, we again are moving down the same pattern, but in a most modern way.
In general, there are similar ethical beliefs amongst Christians due to Judaism being the only root of Christian ethics. In general Christian ethics is deontological and authoritarian and what is deemed right or wrong is based on belief in God. The ethics of Christianity is based on the holy bible, which is a library of books that expresses Christian faith. As the bible was written over a long period of time and includes many different teachings and morals, there is no overall biblical morality that can be chosen therefore different denominations choose different parts of the bible to support their beliefs. For instance in Genesis it says that ‘God breathed the breath of man into Adam’s nostrils’ and from this Roman Catholics can argue that as God has given life, only he can take it away so things such as abortion, euthanasia and murder are absolute wrongs.
Introduction Matthew 22:42 “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is He?”(Holy Bible NIV, 1973) Matthew 27:22 “What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Christ?”(Holy Bible NIV,1973) These questions presented in the gospels were asked by Christ himself to the Pharisees of His day and by Pilate addressing the multitude concerning the crucifixion of Jesus. There have been a number of heresies regarding the deity and the humanity of Christ that arose in the early centuries of church history. Although the early heretics had conflicting opinions, there was more rejection of Christ’s deity than His humanity. New Testament writers demonstrate the importance of keeping a constant balance between the deity and humanity of Christ to avoid difference in opinions regarding the doctrine of Christ (Conner, 1988:167).
Since Baur (Baur 1845)in the 19thcentury, father of the ‘ Tubingen school’, who argued that there were significant differences between Paul’s theology and the beliefs of the Jerusalem church, and Wrede (Wrede 1904) who proposed that without Paul, Christianity would have had little influence and become another Jewish sect; there have been scholars such as Maccoby (Maccoby 1986) and Wilson (Wilson 1997), who have argued that Christianity is not just founded by Paul, but invented by him. 1a. How to proceed ‘No excuse is offered for ... yet another book on Paul, save the excuse offered by the second century author of the Acts of Paul: it was written amori Pauli, for love of Paul.’ (Bruce 1977, p.15) Not all authors writing on Paul might share this view. There is a plethora
With all of the differences in the dogmas between Christianity and Mormonism, there is strong evidence that these two faiths cannot be linked together solely on the fact that they both believe in Jesus Christ being the savior of mankind. Many Christians believe that Mormonism is not a true Christian religion, although Mormons make the claim that they are based on their faith in the Christ Jesus as the sole savior of the world. Can Mormonism, a polytheistic religion, truly be considered Christian, when Christianity
THE CRUSADERS AND THE CHURCH The crusades represent a part of church history that many have attempted to forget and leave hidden within the history books. Some claim the crusades to be a courageous time for the Christian church as they attempted to trample out false doctrine and protect the Holy Land from the cult of Islam. Others will quickly identify the crusades as the darkest and most regretful period of time in the history of the church. Either way, there is much detail surrounding the history of the crusades and how they developed. It is not quite as easy as a black and white assumption because many of the men involved had mixed intentions and sentiments regarding what the crusades were actually about.
Other think another John, known only as the “Elder” and official of the late-first-century Ephesian church. All modern scholar agree that the Gospel and Revelation stem from different authors. No evidence simply calls himself John, a “servant” of Jesus Christ. He is not one of the twelve. Best as John of Patmos, a mystic who regarded himself as a Christian prophet and his book as a highly symbolic preview of future events.
Religious Right author David Barton, perhaps the most outspoken of the “wall of separation” critics, devoted an entire book, The Myth of Separation, to proving his claim that church-state separation is “absurd” and was a principle completely foreign to the Founding Fathers. He states: “In Jefferson’s full letter, he said separation of church and state means the government will not run the church, but we will use Christian principles with government.” More recently, two researchers have published books that criticize the almost infamous status the metaphor has achieved, especially before the U. S. Supreme Court. Daniel Dreisbach, who wrote, Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation between Church and State, is critical of the courts for making the metaphor a practical rule of constitutional law. Dreisbach’s basic argument is that the metaphor fails to distinguish between the conception of “separation” and “non-establishment.” Dreisbach is correct in saying that metaphors can be overstated, misused, and made poor substitutes for legal