Saturday, March 19, 2011

Christianity for all or Christ for all?

Has Christianity become a graven image of God?  Is "Christianity"now a social class, title or group rather than a identity or movement?

Our society has taught us to put things into titles like categorial boxes that are rarely accurate and always divisive.  Titles like Black, White, Straight, Gay, Democrat, and Republican. Titles that do not adequately or accurately define identity, purpose or cause.

If a believer does not claim the title Christian would that void the power of believing the gospel?

What would it look like if a Muslim or Buddhist believed the gospel of Jesus Christ but maintained their cultural traditions?  What would a "Christian" Muslim look like... or a Buddhist "Christian"? If your first thought is, "that's impossible" ask yourself why and then go study scripture and history.  After you get past cliches like "you can't serve to masters"(which is not addressing this issue), reconcile the fact that the practice of Christianity has been influenced by heathen traditions and pagan kings.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ was given to fulfill the law, re-establish our love connection with the father, others and ourselves.  Is this still the purpose, or does God just want us to promote a brand called Christianity?

Doesn't a rose by any other name smell as sweet?

Why has terminology become sacred rather than the mission.

No comments:

Post a Comment