Thanks 'Hoss',
I'll accept this as a good reply to Terry.
I must again voice my objection to the use of the word 'cult' when
describing any religion. The word has such negative connotations that
it can't help but negatively influence those who don't know the
difference, but might just accept this as being gospel and hinder
their own objectivity to decide for themselves. It is patently
unfair, and decidedly unchristian.
As for the Trinity and the Nicene Creed etc., I haven't really
thought this through at this juncture. Christian Science does have a
decidedly different approach to understanding theology but I don't
know if it is in direct conflict with established orthodox teachings
or the Nicene creed etc. As Mrs. Eddy wrote in 1879, the Christian
Science church was 'designed to commemorate the words and works of
our Master (Jesus), which should reinstate primitive Christianity and
its lost element of healing.' Since primitive Christianity is
considered to be the period of 300 years or so after Christ's
ascension, which is well in advance of the Nicene council, then
perhaps we aren't in step with the orthodox doctrine. I however, make
no apology for this, because I have to wonder what Jesus would have
to say about all the various debates and arguments and councils which
have surrounded his teachings for almost 1500 years. This is what I
personally like about Christian Science, that it is !
unf
ettered by human doctrines and gets back to the pure spirit of
Christianity which Jesus taught and demonstrated and expected his
followers to also demonstrate.
ANyway, If you see fit to give me the boot, so be it. I won't protest
your jurisdiction.
Stuart Kirkley
--On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 16:02:56 JW Burgeson wrote: >Terry wrote, in part: "I know that it is politically incorrect to say what >I'm about to say, but I will say it." > >Count me as one person who welcomes "politically incorrect" dialog. > >"I suspect that most people in the ASA and on this list do regard >Christian Science to be an unorthodox cult." > >I would probably temper that somewhat, although I don't know a lot about CS. >I'd observe that they are certainly unorthodox -- in the same way as process >theologians and the advocates of "open theism." Yeah -- I'd include Roman >Catholics in that classification too. And I have close friends, and several >family members who are, thus, "unorthodox." I certainly do not "read any of >them out of the Christian family." > >"The ASA statement of faith is very "big-tent" and points to the >Apostles' and Nicene creed as fundamental statements of orthodoxy as >being accurate statements of the teaching of scripture. These are the >classic Christian creeds defining the Trinity and the Incarnation. In >general, we do not regard as Christians those who disagree with these >doctrines (part of what it means to acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord >and Savior is to agree with the teachings of these creeds)." > >Hmm. When you say "we" in the above, do you mean to speak for all in the >ASA? I personally have no problems with the recitation of the Apostle's >Creed as part of my own church service; I say it because I hold it to be >confessionally accurate. Can't speak to the Nicene because I'm not up to >speed on it. But I think that Rudolf Bultman did not agree with these >creeds; and certainly was not orthodox; but I've read his stuff closely; w/o >agreeing with his position I am personally not able to label him as "not a >Christian." > >"I speak as an ASA member who is zealous to maintain the "evangelical" >integrity of our group and our discussions." > >The word "evangelical" in there bothers me, I guess. I'm probably not an >"evangelical," although I suppose it must turn on one's understanding of >that word. I do know that from time to time I review the ASA statement of >faith and have never seen anything there which suggests I am nor eligible. I >have a very close friend of 40+ years who is a Catholic priest; I would see >no reason he would not equally be eligible. But perhaps others see this >differently. > >Thanks for the comments, Terry. And I see this discussion as proper for the >LISTSERV. It speaks to foundational issues, after all. > >Hoss (aka Burgy) > >http://www.burgy.50megs.com > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com >
See Dave Matthews Band live or win a signed guitar http://r.lycos.com/r/bmgfly_mail_dmb/http://win.ipromotions.com/lycos_020201/splash.asp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 27 2002 - 02:10:21 EDT