Is Liberal Christianity Smug and Arrogant?

by leavingwt 95 Replies latest jw friends

  • tec

    Well, I think that a person can know the Holy Spirit, if the Holy Spirit chooses to reveal himself to that person. Perfectly? I don't know. Maybe that is an ongoing revelation... a teaching.

    Isn't there an inspirational quote that may be from the Bible that we know God but through a glass darkly in this life.

    1Corinthians 13:12 perhaps? "Now we see but a poor reflection; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."

    Taken in context, Paul's entire discussion is focused on love, and on how we know in part, prophecy in part, etc... but that they are all worth nothing without love. But we can see/know God by seeing/knowing His Son, Christ. That is what Christ said.

    I know that nontrinitarians call themselves Christian but I personally fail to see how this is a different from a HIndu or Buddhist or Muslim who may believe in Jesus as a special teacher.

    I don't believe in the trinity, but I see Christ as much more than just a great teacher - though He was also that. He was also the Son of God. The one who came and showed us God as God truly is. Seeing and hearing Christ is the same as seeing and hearing the Father, because Christ is the perfect image of His Father.

    I think Ghandi was a great teacher too, but not the Son of God. There have been other great teachers too, but I in no way hold them to the same mold as Christ, the Son and Image of God.

    Traditions of centuries do not appeal to me - at least not in Christianity - because of so many harmful things that may have come to listening to them because they are old or tradition. That is not to say that some are not good. But I don't follow a tradition. I follow Christ (or at least I do my best, and try to learn when I fail). If that tradition happens to follow his teachings also, great. If not, not so great.

    For what its worth, I can vouch for Shelby (AGuest) that she meant absolutely no disrespect by responding to your post in increments. That is her style, and for the reasons she gave - that she not miss or overlook anything you stated. I do the same if a post is long, and I'm having trouble answering in one lump. She has been my friend on and off the board, and she loves our Lord with all her heart.


  • AGuest
    I just so happen to have my J.D. from NYU School of Law.

    Congratulations and good for you, truly! I wasn't privileged to go to so prestigious a school. I have a mortgage so I had to work full-time and so either went at night or attended around my work schedule. One of the best things I ever did, however, and I loved every minute of it. Considered going for an LL.M, and may still, one day. But not now. Since I went to university at age 40, it was quite a physical and financial fete for me.

    The school awarded me a full merit scholarship.

    Wonderful! That means you are quite bright, yes? I am not so bright. Unfortunately, my mom died (after a long battle with cancer) on my 18th birthday, just after the start of the semester I was supposed to leave to go to UCLA (on full academic scholarship). Knocked me for a loop and so I chose to start a family instead (in great part, to fill the void). Nevertheless, never regretted it, not for one second, because I ended up with the most fantastic kids (age 28 and 33) who are pretty successful in their lives. No grandkids, yet, but two chihuahuas that are just like having toddlers...

    Frankly, I have much contact with lawyers

    I have had my share over the years, dear one. Started working for them right out of high school, to working with them, literally, through my work in housing and in the courts, and now even playing in a band with one (a Harvard graduate attorney who's Managing Partner of his prestigious SF law firm... and my keyboardist).

    and I have never come across a single one who expresses themselves the way you do.

    Yes, well, one, I'm not an attorney. I direct the Fair Housing Program for a Bay Area FHQO. I've never really spoken like someone who went to law school, let alone a lawyer, however (gave me the willies, too, when the kids did it in law school). Sort of affectatious to me. Most of my career (23+ years) has been in housing (I hold many certifications) and UD mediation, and so I tend to rub elbows not only with judges and lawyers, but with the common folk, as well. So, it serves me better to speak, well, fairly ordinarily.

    I do love to explain the law and rights, etc., though, to those who aren't as "in the know"... you know, as you and I are. It's really why I went to law school: to try and help those who ordinarily can't afford "real" legal help. You know... the poor, disabled, homeless, elderly, non-English speaking. Those who pretty much got by-passed when the trust funds were being handed out. But I didn't want to work for Legal Aid (they have to reject too many cases, so they pick over them... and folks still get left out. Didn't want to be a part of that). My career will be changing soon, however, somewhat: I am starting a school/job placement agency here in the Bay Area in March 2011... teaching people what I know so that they can get great jobs, too!

    I disagree with your content but I adamantly object to your attitude.

    Ummmm... dear BOTR, look. I don't want you to leave the Board, truly. Everyone is welcome here (well, almost everyone; they tend to ban perverts, pedophiles, and overly mean people, among others). I don't know how old you are, but I am guessing perhaps under 30 (maybe even under 40, but I could be wrong as to both) because of your reference to your schooling and "credentials" (us older folk usually don't care about such stuff - doesn't mean a whit under certain circumstances and usually none at all here). Or perhaps you are an immigrant or foreign citizen... or not an American (which I am, sorry if that offends you, but I am what I am and not always ashamed of it), which would explain as well.

    But I must caution you that you should probably try to develop just a bit of a thicker skin... as well as muster up a little benefit of the doubt for others. Because you are reading tones and intentions into my response/comments that were not there... or intended... at all. At all. You and I disagree as to God being triune. I explained, to some degree... why I don't believe it. It was not a personal attack on you - just a disagreement with a certain general statement that you made and what you believe. Which is one of the beauties of this board: most here come from a stint in the WTBTS were positions, beliefs, opinions... or just common talk... that didn't agree with the teachings/doctrines were not only frowned upon, but dangerous. One could/can lose one's entire family and/or livelihood as a result.

    Here, though... we have a measure of freedom of speech. And I intend to use it. Hopefully, not in too much offense to others (a lot of that I cannot help - it's on them), but always in truth (or humor, where truth isn't the issue).

    So, whether you choose to stay or leave is upon you. Do what you believe is best for you. I will not address you if that's what you want... unless you address, comment, or respond to me. Deal?

    Again peace to you!

    A slave of Christ,


  • garyneal

    Wow, much has been said on the topic.

    Is liberal Christianity smug and arrogant? I suppose 'liberal Christians' can appear smug and arrogant. Especially when the so called 'smart' ones denounce the ones who firmly believe in a young Earth, a literal worldwide flood, etc.. It cuts both ways though.

    As much as I respect and admire Walter Martin, I could not help but to be concerned over his referring to liberal theology as a cult. Sometimes a label, like cult, can get thrown around and applied to anything someone disagrees with. Reminds me of how Rush Limbaugh uses the term 'liberal' liberally (ha ha).

    Christianity is certainly progressive as a whole. I find it odd sometimes that certain groups of Christians will denounce certain practices (like women preachers) while embracing other groups of Christians as their brothers and sisters in Christ that engage in these practices. It gets confusing when you hear religious leaders and followers denounce certain acts but then commits them later and employ special pleading to justify them.

    An Independant Fundamental Baptist preacher once preached from the pulpit that if one is a member of their home church and that one goes and visits another church, that person is committing adultery against his or her's home church. I later decided to become a member of a Southern Baptist church, leaving his church. Sometime after that, I phoned him just to catch up on things and during our conversation he asked if I was attending church. I told him yes and that I was a member of a Southern Baptist church. Near the end of the conversation, he invited me to come visit his church sometime and I asked in response, "But what about what you said concerning my committing adultery against my home church?" He replied, "Weeeell, ..." I forget the rest of what he said but I remember him backpedalling big time.

    In another Independant Fundamental Baptist church, the preacher was big on not working on Sunday. Even advising young ones to seek jobs that permit people to take Sunday off. Needless to say, finding a job was tough for a teenager / young adult and telling the local McDonalds that you cannot work Sundays does not sit well with the hiring managers. My uncle on my stepfather's side, who was really into this church, one day went to do a job on Sunday between the morning and evening worship hours. After he finished the job, I asked him, "I thought we were not suppose to work on Sundays." He responded along the lines of sometimes doing what you have to do. While this is true it does not say much for faith that God will provide for those who follow His commandments.

    It did not take long for me to come to the conclusion that legalist Christians are hypocrites. One cannot possibly come up with so many rules governing how we are suppose to live without coming up with contradictions to your rules, forcing you to break one or more of them. True Christianity, at least the kind I believe in, is not about rules but about love and compassion for one another and the knowledge that righteousness cannot be earned by following a certain set of rules governing our behavior.

  • PSacramento

    I think the only time someone or something can be smug or arrogant is when they proclaim:

    I/we am/are right and everyone else is wrong.

  • AGuest

    You mean like George W saying the U.S. action against Saddam Hussein was "the right thing to do," although virtually "everyone" else said it wasn't, dear PSacto (the greatest of love and peace to you, dear one!)?

    Again, peace to you!

    A slave of Christ,


  • PSacramento

    GWB arrogant and smug?

    Never !

    How can a politician be arogant and smug ???

    LMAO !

Share this