Basic Christianity Is Extreme To Those Without Faith

I've come to believe that there is something in our fallen natures that wants to temper our dedication to God (who is The God of Abraham, The God of Isaac, and The God of Jacob). Roosh describes it in OP from the perspective of the nonbeliever, but I've seen it from the perspective of the believer, too. And I've seen it in myself at times. These are the subtleties of the old man, perhaps encouraged by the subtleties of the enemy. I used to belong to a ministry in which we often discussed 'poster sins'. Think sex, drugs, alcohol, etc... But once God brings us out of those, the really deep stuff starts to get exposed, and speaking from personal experience it can be very ugly. So the journey is the opposite of self exultation, it's the brutality of dying to self. That's when God is glorified, in my opinion.
 

jakester318

Sparrow
It's not uncommon for people to object to a change in the life of a new follower of Jesus. I've been there. But I can also remember that at times my piety was also a manifestation of self-righteousness. I think as we grown in our relationship with Christ, we also grow in our understanding of how to be charitable to those outside of the faith. In some cases, people are wrong to hate the faith of a zealous new Christian and in some cases, zealousness can also lack charity. It's a balance. In most cases, people will not respect your belief no matter what and that's just the way it is. But to give the unbeliever any reason to despise our piety except those that are good, is reason for us to look inwardly.

But at the end of the day, Jesus said: "they hated me and they will also hate you."
 

infowarrior1

Hummingbird
Because they're insecure and spiritually dead. Since I've embraced Orthodoxy, there have been people who've called me a fundamentalist in a degrading manner, ridiculed my faith, scoffed at my interest in reading the bible, called me a totalitarian, and lacked any understanding of why I'm opposed to all forms of degeneracy in addition to how harmful decadence has been to our society.

Whilst there are problems of legalism. It seems Fundamentalists are the only Protestants that seem to actually take Christianity seriously in the USA of all the Low Churches.

Hence they associate all Christians who actually believe as Fundamentalists. And see all genuine Christians as Pharisaic Legalists.

And would like to mould all Traditional Christianity into the Fundamentalist mould that they can categorize and marginalize into ghettos.
 

DelMarMisty

Newbie
I've come to believe that there is something in our fallen natures that wants to temper our dedication to God (who is The God of Abraham, The God of Isaac, and The God of Jacob). Roosh describes it in OP from the perspective of the nonbeliever, but I've seen it from the perspective of the believer, too. And I've seen it in myself at times. These are the subtleties of the old man, perhaps encouraged by the subtleties of the enemy. I used to belong to a ministry in which we often discussed 'poster sins'. Think sex, drugs, alcohol, etc... But once God brings us out of those, the really deep stuff starts to get exposed, and speaking from personal experience it can be very ugly. So the journey is the opposite of self exultation, it's the brutality of dying to self. That's when God is glorified, in my opinion.
What are the deeper sins outside of the 'poster sins'?
 
What are the deeper sins outside of the 'poster sins'?

Wow, man. How much time do you have? Instead of giving you a huge boring list, let me try to give a Biblical example. In Luke 10:27-28, we see an unnamed lawyer correctly identify the 2 most important commandments after Jesus asks him how he 'reads' (interprets) the law. Then in Luke 10:29 he incorrectly applies it by trying to limit its scope:

But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?

This may seem like an obvious pitfall for the serious Christian to avoid, especially when you consider that the root of the sin is identified right in the verse. However, this sort of misapplication of limiting scope of "who does this apply to?" is all over the place, and it's especially prevalent among teachers and preachers. In fact its a very trendy way to teach present day.

Now, that being said, we do know that there are examples when it is correct to limit the scope of a particular Scripture. A good example: Jesus said that it's His Father's good pleasure to give His "little flock" the kingdom...clearly He wasn't speaking to unbelievers. If one were to broaden the scope of that Scripture in application, it would also be an error. This is the type of thing that takes discernment and maturity to apply.

In my ministry, I often see Christians that most would consider to be strong to struggle with this area. What this often looks like is a man or a woman is often able to correctly give spiritual food, but struggles to receive. They can take a Bible study, for example, and discern that a particular lesson is needed by a Brother or Sister, but struggle to see the same need in themselves. And yes, I have struggled with this at times myself and still struggle with it, though (hopefully) not as much as I once did.

Here is a verse that I believe applies:

We use God’s mighty weapons, not worldly weapons, to knock down the strongholds of human reasoning and to destroy false arguments.

2 Corinthians 10:4
 
Top